Insurers, Attorneys Point Fingers in Hurricane Michael Aftermath
About 17,000 insurance claims from Hurricane Michael remain unsettled just over a year after the deadly storm ravaged parts of the Panhandle.
October 16, 2019 at 02:33 PM
4 minute read
Insurers and attorneys blamed each other as about 17,000 insurance claims from Hurricane Michael remained unsettled just over a year after the deadly storm ravaged parts of the Panhandle.
Appearing before the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee, Locke Burt, a former senator who is president of Ormond Beach-based Security First Insurance, called for litigation reform because he said lawyers view the damages from Michael as a "gold rush" for themselves.
"An attorney can get an unlimited amount of money for suing a property insurance company in Florida," Burt said. "I would estimate that the plaintiffs' bar is going to make between $300 [million] and $400 million suing insurance companies as a result of Hurricane [Michael]. That's about $40,000 in fees per case. The defense costs are going to be on top of that."
Burt, saying the industry in Florida is barely breaking even because of litigation, expects rates statewide to go up 20% to 30% next year, making it more difficult for property owners to get coverage and driving people to the state-backed Citizens Property Insurance Corp. or to the surplus lines market, which provides coverage for hard-to-insure properties.
Meanwhile, attorneys appearing Tuesday at the Senate committee said lawmakers need to put more teeth in a law that requires insurers to pay claims within 90 days, as currently the window is from when the insurer settles on how much is owed and the offer is accepted.
They also disputed Burt's "gold rush" claim.
"There is not just a cadre of policy holders just waiting to make a claim, to go sign with attorneys and unlimited attorney fees," attorney Chip Merlin said. "They don't want to hire me. But when they do, they want to make sure my fees are going to get paid for, to go beat these insurance companies."
Attorney Amy Boggs, of Boggs Law Group, said a bigger issue for homeowners confronting damage from Michael involves insurers disputing whether wind or flooding caused damages. She said that has resulted in homeowners being underpaid by $100,000 and more in many circumstances.
While insurers typically are responsible for covering wind damage, they might not have to pay if the damage can be pinned on flooding.
"We had a Category 5 wind event in Mexico Beach and Panama City, the wind carrier should be paying something," Boggs said.
Michael which made landfall in Mexico Beach on Oct. 10, 2018, had spurred 149,448 claims as of Sept. 27, most involving residential properties, according to the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation.
Of the claims, 132,201, or 88.4%, had been closed.
Sen. Darryl Rouson, D-St. Petersburg, said policyholders aren't interested in the games between attorneys and insurers.
"People are frustrated. They want action," Rouson said. "They want suggestions that lead toward solutions. They want these claims settled and closed appropriately."
Rouson challenged Tasha Carter, Florida's insurance consumer advocate, to come up with legislation to help consumers.
Committee Chairman Doug Broxson, R-Gulf Breeze, noted former House Speaker Allan Bense has highlighted a problem facing Panama City property owners in which policyholders have been forced to deal with multiple adjusters. Bense is from Panama City and sustained property damage in the hurricane.
After the meeting, Broxson said "it's a complicated landscape" as insurers and consumers expressed being in trouble.
Sen. Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg, warned that the insurance industry is on an "unsustainable trajectory" that is headed to a "Wild West" marketplace.
"What's ultimately going to happen … is we're driving more and more consumers to an [excess and surplus lines] market where they don't understand what the products that they're purchasing are," Brandes said.
Jim Turner reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readBack-To-Back Hurricanes' Impact on Florida Legal Work Will Go Beyond Usual Suspects
5 minute readHolland & Knight Snags 2 Insurance Partners in New York and Philadelphia From Goodwin
3 minute readTurning the Tables: Defense Litigators Embrace Lawsuits, Alleging Fraud at Plaintiffs Shops
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Russian Official Alleges Fraud in Miami Real Estate Dispute Over Trump Palace Condo
- 2Founder of Failed Crypto Lender Confesses to Fraud
- 3How a Tetraplegic Linklaters Lawyer Defied All Odds
- 4Trump Seeks to Have Georgia Election Case Dismissed, Cites Presidential Immunity
- 5Elon Musk Has a Lot More Than a 'Tornetta' Appeal to Resolve in Delaware
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250