[CLC-Discussion] New Bill seeks to stop assignments of benefits

[Jeff Price]

So nobody need waste time, here are the pertinent analysis points by the staff as published in the House concerning the post-loss assignment:

 

“Policyholders with insurance policies that prohibit post-loss assignments may incur out of pocket expenses to pay the repair contractor or vendor up front; however, the policyholder should be reimbursed for these expenses by the property insurer when the claim is paid and settled.

According to proponents of the PCS, assignment of benefits are becoming increasingly common in property insurance claims, especially in water damage claims where a homeowner assigns his or her right to receive benefits on their property insurance to a contractor or vendor who repairs the damaged property. Some insurers assert assignment of benefits to a contractor or vendor in a water damage claim can be problematic because if the contractor or vendor submits an invoice to the insurer that is more than what the insurer estimates it should cost to remediate and dry-out the policyholder’s residence, the insurer must investigate the claim, determine why the invoice is higher than estimated by the insurer, and identify whether all the work indicated in the invoice was performed. Insurance policies typically provide authority for the insurer to take certain actions to investigate claims, such as requiring policyholders to file proofs of loss, to produce records, and to submit to examinations under oath. However, contractors or vendors obtaining an assignment of benefits for the claim many times allege they do not have to comply with the insurer’s claims investigation authorized under the insurance policy because they agreed only to an assignment of the insurance benefits and did not agree to assume any of the duties under the insurance policy.”

 

 

Jeffrey L. Price, Esq.
Florida Bar Board Certified - Construction Law      
 

Niesen|Price|Worthy|Campo, PA
5216 SW 91st Drive  Gainesville, FL 32608
Ph (352) 373-9031   Fax (352) 373-9099

 <http://npw-law.com/> http://npw-law.com

 

ConstructionLaw small logo               NPW_Logo_Fluted_Thumb (1)              

 

This communication is intended for the sole use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If the reader of this communication is not the intended recipient, employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify me by telephone, delete this communication, and destroy any copies of it.  Thank you.

 

 

From: Michael R. Romm, P.A.
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 9:33 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: New Bill seeks to stop assignments of benefits

 

To Everyone:  I represent a number of fire and water damage restoration companies and an Assignment of Benefits, Direct Payment Authorization is standard operating procedure for all of my clients.  Has anyone brought up for discussion yet HOUSE BILL 909 (2013)?  If not, then I urge everyone to help me fight this bill.  I represent a number of general contractors who perform fire and water damage restoration based on their estimates to the insurance company.  My clients usually insist on getting an Assignment of Benefits from the homeowner which assigns their rights as insureds under their homeowner's policy to the fire/water damage restoration company (usually a general contractor).  If the insurance company tries to wrongfully cut the estimate down or otherwise refuses to pay a valid claim, my client stands in the shoes of the homeowner and sues the insurance company.  This is a bad bill.  Anybody have any thoughts or comments?   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20130328/ae236ad7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1867 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20130328/ae236ad7/image001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 7687 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20130328/ae236ad7/image002.png>