Using a Public Adjuster for Your Insurance Claim?

OPPAGA Report Finds that Insureds Received Larger Insurance Settlements when Public Adjuster Involved in Claim.  Florida Legislature Considers Additional Regulations Governing Solicitation by Public Adjusters. 

 The number of public adjusters in Florida increased by more than 300% over the last six (6) years - no doubt as a direct result of the catastrophic damages caused by hurricanes in 2004 and 2005.  As the deadline to file Hurricane Wilma claims becomes closer and closer, more homeowners, association leaders and building managers are being solicited to re-open old claims.  In the aftermath of Hurricane Wilma many distraught association leaders readily 'signed on the dotted line' after being told 'not to worry' about the association's insurance claim or repairs to the property. 

Did the use of a public adjuster make a difference?  The report issued by the Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability (OPPAGA) finds that claims took longer but payouts were higher when a public adjuster represented the insured.  In fact, Citizens Property Insurance Corporation paid insureds represented by public adjusters at least five time (5x) more than it paid insureds handling claims by themselves.

While Section 626.8795, Florida Statutes specifically prohibits the public adjuster from having anything to do with the repair or reconstruction of the damaged property, contractors and public adjusters often seemed interchangeable to association leaders.  The Department of Financial Services recently stepped-up enforcement efforts against contractors - including United Roofing Systems.    Moreover, solicitations became so intrusive that the Florida laws were amended in both 2008 and 2009 to impose restrictions:

  • limiting hours of solicitation (in person or by telephone) from Monday through Saturday between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.;
  • prohibiting contact with policyholders until at least 48 hours after an event; and
  • limiting fees to 10% of the claims related to declared emergencies and 20% for all other new claims.

 SB 2264, filed by Senator Bennett seeks to control solicitation by public adjusters even more and according to the Sun-Sentinel, industry groups are all for it, claiming that public adjusters lead to higher premiums.  Among other things the bill seeks to:

  • prohibit solicitation in person or by phone (unless the insured is someone they know or a family member);
  • require written communications to include the word 'ADVERTISEMENT' in red ink and be sent via regular mail (not certified or registered);
  • prohibit mailers until 30 days after the insurable event takes place; and importantly
  • cap fees at the 10%/20% limits for re-opened claims.

Contracts between insureds and public adjusters often result in disputes leading to expensive and protracted litigation.  It is therefore extremely important to consult with counsel before entering into any contract with a public adjuster or contractor after a casualty occurs.  For more information on disaster planning and recovery, please go to www.hurricane-recovery.com.

 

Records Retention: Risks of Failing to Comply with the Statute - Limiting Exposure

In my last 2 posts I discussed the dangers of failing to comply with the records retention provisions of Florida law. This post will touch on things the Association can do to limit its exposure.

First, the Association needs to ensure it understands exactly which records must be maintained by statute [§718.111(12) and §720.303(4)]. For example, I get many questions about whether the audio recording of Board meeting must be maintained. The truth is it depends. The recording must be maintained until such time as the minutes are approved and then it can be destroyed [Fla. Admin. Code 61B-23.002]. However, if there is a delay in approving the minutes, the recording must be kept as an official record and must be provided for inspection should such a request be made.

Second, in determining which records are to be retained, it is important for the Association to understand the “gray” area [§718.111(12)(15) and §720.303(4)(l)] set forth in each statute. In dealing with the gray area, the Association should consult with its attorney to determine what items fall within the gray area “catch all” as determined by the Legislature, Division and/or Courts.

Third, the Association needs to create a strict policy addressing where the documents are to be housed. The statutes provide for location limitations (Condominiums - 45 miles from the condominium or within the county in which the condominium is located; homeowners associations - within the state in which the HOA is located]) which are for the most part followed. The problem is that some Associations allow some of their records to be retained by their property managers, some by the Board members and others in a storage area on Association property. In these instances, it is usually difficult for the Board or even its manager to truly know where all the documents are such that full compliance with a records inspection request or discovery in a case is difficult to accomplish. A singular location needs to be chosen which allows the Association easy access to comply with a records inspection request or a discovery request in case. If this cannot occur as to the current year’s records, then a singular location as to the records of prior years should be created and a detailed list of where the current year’s records are maintained should be maintained by the Board and its manager for easy reference.

Fourth, the Association needs to create a policy through which it ensure that each time the members leave the Board that a full inventory of documents and the actual documents in the possession the former Board member is provided to the Association. In the spirit of being neighborly, the new Board should request the documents from the old Board members before contacting the Association’s attorney for assistance. If the records are not turned over however the new Board must seek legal assistance.

Fifth, whenever the records or a part of them are to be maintained by the management company, the Association with the assistance of counsel, should ensure the contract provides specific information as to what documents the company will be charged with maintaining and the manner in which the records will need to be turned over to the Association upon termination. The contract should also provide specific language regarding the repercussions to the management company for failure to turn over or otherwise improperly destroy or damage the documents of the Association. The Association’s attorney can help prepare the language for the contract to ensure these protections.

Sixth, the Association should ensure that if it suspects a set of documents will be or otherwise address the subject of a suit (threatened or filed) it should seek the advice of its attorney as to whether the documents must be retained or otherwise destroyed as part of the Association’s standard practice.

Seventh, the Association should create a policy which addresses destruction of records. This policy should address when a record is subject to destruction, who is responsible for the destruction and how it will be destroyed.

Please note that while no system is foolproof the key to its success is its ease. The easier the policy is to understand and follow the greater the likelihood it will be properly followed.
 

Operation of Golf Carts Being Considered by Legislature

What policies does your community have in place regarding the use, storage and operation of golf carts?  Can owners ride the golf carts to the local convenience store, coffee shop or hair dresser?  Adoption of a new proposal will allow local governments to create their own regulations governing the use of golf carts, which pleases many Condo & HOA owners.  In Bradenton, Florida seniors listed golf cart usage as a priority, as the cost is insignificant and many of them have given up driving automobiles.  The Bradenton Herald recently included a story describing what changes would result from SB 2448. 

Ambiguities regarding the use of golf carts are not new.  In 2002, the Florida Attorney General released an Advisory Legal Opinion in reply to an inquiry regarding whether a municipality may impose a minimum age requirement for the operation of a golf cart which was more restrictive than those found in the Florida Statutes or whether a City may require the operator of a golf cart to have a valid Florida Driver’s License, the answer to both being 'no'.  In 2004, Charlie Crist, as Florida's Attorney General, issued an Advisory Legal Opinion (AGO 2004-60) implying that a community association could not adopt rules prohibiting persons under the age of 16 from using golf carts on public streets in the country club community.   He also indicated that the Association could not force golf cart users to use child safety devices, which resulted in changes to the Florida Statutes.

Under proposed SB 2448, the local government would be obligated to:

  1. issue a finding that golf carts, bicycles and pedestrians can share the sidewalk safely;
  2. consult with the Department of Transportation;
  3. restrict speed to no more than 15 mph and only permit use on sidewalks at least 8 feet wide;
  4. retain (or supplement) golf cart equipment requirements; and
  5. post appropriate signage.

Community associations need to address golf cart, scooter and other transportation device use and storage issues carefully - even with respect to private property.  Consult with counsel to determine what types of regulations are appropriate and enforceable.  It is also a good idea to check whether the insurance policies contain exclusions or specific requirements for claims involving golf carts.

 

Will Your Insurance Carrier Have the Ability to Pay Claims?

Has your carrier been 'red-flagged'?  The Florida Association of Insurance Agents and other industry professionals warned the legislature about carrier financial instability, underwriting losses and reductions in surplus funds.  Sarasota's Herald-Tribune reports that "Weak Insurers put Floridians at Risk" and notes that carriers in Florida are highly more leveraged than in other states.

The Herald-Tribune's investigation found:

  • One third of homeowners rely on private insurance carriers that exhibit at least one sign of financial risk;
     
  • More than 100,000 homeowners rely on companies that can barely pay claims for fires, let alone hurricanes or other casualties; and
     
  • Almost one-third of the private carriers have decreased cash set aside for claims.

A presentation by Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty stated:

    • A license to operate as an insurer should never be confused as a complete guarantee if financial health and profitability.  These are private companies and sometimes economic conditions can create financial distress to one degree or another.

    • Solvency regulation is designed to reduce financial risks for the policyholder by proactive early detection of potential insurer distresses; and

    • Current market conditions have impacted insurers to varying degrees and will likely continue.

Herald-Tribune identifies six (6) carriers with red flags:  Homewise Preferred; Magnolia Insurance; Northern Capital Insurance; People's Trust; Sunshine State; and Southern Oak Insurance.  Coral Insurance and American Keystone insurance failed last year and Magnolia is reportedly under state supervision, but has not been liquidated.

Citizens' Insurance Corp., has become the primary insurer.  However there is an understanding in the industry that premiums charged by Citizens are 40-60% below sustainable rates, leaving Floridians subject to assessments for casualty losses.

Community leaders are well advised to educate themselves about the financial stability of the carriers providing coverage to their communities and to understand whether FIGA provides any relief in the event of insolvency.

Your Vote Counts in the Best of Blog Awards

We are proud to be nominated as a Best Blog in the Sun-Sentinel's Best of Blog Awards.  The voting process is already underway - click HERE to vote for Florida Condo & HOA Law Blog in the Business and Technology Category!

 

 

Ignoring Architectural Control Provisions Can Be Costly

The governing documents for many community associations provide that the Association must review plans and then issue written consent for construction of improvements or modifications - especially if those improvements or modifications will be visible to other owners, involve the common elements or association property and/or impact utility services to the property. 

We learned long ago from the case of Hidden Harbour Estates, Inc. v. Norman, that condominium residents give up a degree of their individual freedoms for the benefit of all unit owners. Similarly, by virtue of detailed, recorded covenants and restrictions, single-family homeowners give up freedoms they might otherwise enjoy, were they not living in planned communities. These restrictions are an area in which individual autonomy is subrogated to the common good.

All too often, however, property owners ignore the architectural control provisions of the governing documents.  When timely and consistent enforcement action is taken by the Association against an owner who has made unapproved changes, the appropriate remedy awarded by the court is a mandatory injunction. The courts have broad discretion to fashion an appropriate remedy, but usually a court's order requires the offending owner to remove unauthorized changes and to restore the original condition of the property. In several cases the courts have required removal of balcony enclosures, storm shutters, decorative features, fences, patios, and newly painted colors.  Some homeowners in Pasco County, Florida recently learned this lesson the hard way.  Bay News 9 showed demolition of recently constructed expensive docks that were built without HOA consent.  One homeowner said she paid Sixty-Five Thousand ($65,000) Dollars to build the dock - only to watch it being dismantled after losing a court battle with the Association.
 

  • A homeowner thought that since he obtained a permit for the installation, HOA approval was not necessary - not true.
  • Another homeowner thought that since the HOA didn't own the property underneath the dock that HOA approval was not necessary - not true.
  • Another homeowner thought that approval by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) overruled the HOA - not true.

HOA leaders need to be cognizant of Section 720.3035, Florida Statutes, which became effective on July 1, 2007. This law does not eliminate an association’s ability to regulate alterations to a lot but does require that authority be specifically stated or reasonably inferred from the written covenants or other published guidelines and standards authorized by the declaration of covenants. Home or Unit Owners need to learn and understand what procedures are in place in their community association to avoid costly problems.

Council Addresses Fire Sprinkler Retrofit Requirements

Naples City Council Urged by CALL to Adopt Resolution in Support of HB 561 and SB 1222 to Extend Deadline for Compliance with Costly Fire Sprinkler Retrofit Requirements.  Collier County Commissioners Expected to Consider Resolution at Upcoming Meeting.

Representatives from the State Fire Marshal's Office presented information to City Council members and interested citizens regarding the improvements required for high-rise buildings (including condominiums and cooperatives) to comply with the Florida Fire Prevention Code.  A recent report of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation pegged estimated compliance costs at up to $8,600 per unit. This, at a the time of an historic decline in property values and unprecedented association assessment delinquencies, all while the efficacy of the requirement has yet to be shown.

While Florida Statutes, Section 718.112(2)(l) provides that an Association may vote to opt out of the requirements to retrofit the units of a high-rise residential condominium, currently there is no way to avoid a partial retrofit of interior common areas in a high rise building (a building greater than 75 feet in height).   WZVN (Channel 7) reported about the "angry condo association presidents" and county leaders that hoped to extend the deadline or even change the law completely. 
 

On another note - we are proud to be nominated as a Best Blog in the Sun-Sentinel's Best of Blog Awards.  The voting process is already underway - click HERE to vote for Florida Condo & HOA Law Blog in the Business and Technology Category! 

 

Q&A: What Happens After the Association Acquires Title by Foreclosure?

A reader recently posed the following inquiry:

I am interested in your thoughts about Fee Simple Communities foreclosing on properties and working with the banks to accept a short sale. As President of a small community (65 units) HOA, we have foreclosed on 3 units and soon to be 5. All but one have a mortgage and all 4 mortgages are above the value of the property. The banks are not accepting short sale offers without involvement from the mortgagor which in cases in close to impossible. Three of the banks are in foreclosure with the longest process exceeding 3 years. Motions to compel are denied and we are looking for creative ways to speed this process and begin to collect from a new homeowner or at least get my 1%/12.

This situation is becoming more and more prevalent throughout the State. Attorney Kevin Miller provides the following comments:

A motion for case management conference can be a useful tool on behalf of any association involved in a mortgage foreclosure action. In this motion, the association's counsel asks the court to establish reasonable deadlines to bring the case to conclusion, ultimately resulting in a foreclosure sale whereby either the mortgagee or another party will take title to the property. In instances where the association has already foreclosed and taken title to the property, and the mortgagee has filed its own foreclosure, the association may be able to simply consent and stipulate to a judgment and either bring about a sale or transfer of title much sooner. Particularly when the foreclosing party plaintiff is the mortgagee and the defendant owner is the association, and there are no other parties to the action. 
 

What about the 'short sale' option?  

The U.S. Treasury announced new federal guidelines that give lenders a 10-day limit in which to respond to short sale purchase offers. These rules may provide much needed relief, as the Sun-Sentinel reported approximately 40% of South Florida homeowners owe more than the property is worth.  The rules also provide financial incentives for both sellers and lenders.

Is the Association really entitled to any payment from a first mortgagee when the it forecloses its mortgage after the Association has foreclosed its claim of lien?

Remember, the statutes provide for joint and several liability with the previous owner (with the exception of the safe harbor provisions for first mortgagees).  Thus, once the Association takes title to a unit or home after completing a lien foreclosure case, it technically becomes liable for the debt of the previous owner and cannot necessarily seek to collect that debt from a subsequent owner, even if the subsequent owner is a mortgagee.  Any subsequent owner (mortgagee or otherwise) bears responsibility for payment of all assessments from and after the date title is acquired.

We will address additional options in further posts, including the benefits and detriments to renting the properties acquired as a result of foreclosure.  Stay tuned.
 

 

Supreme Court of Florida Issues New Foreclosure Rules

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure Largely Derived From Recommendations of the Task Force on Residential Mortgage Foreclosure Cases.

Some of the changes are as follows:

Verification of Mortgage Foreclosure Complaints:  This requires the Plaintiff (lender) to attest to the truthfulness of the allegations in the complaint.  It is intended to minimize erroneous filings, conserve judicial resources by reducing the number of cases with "lost note" issues and provide the court with greater authority to sanction lenders that make false allegations.

Changes the Affidavit of Diligent Search:  When the defendants cannot be served personally, the law allows the foreclosure case to proceed after publication of a notice.  This new form requires the person that conducted the search to sign the Affidavit (instead of the lender) and to provide more information about the search.

New Form - Motion to Cancel and Reschedule Foreclosure Sale:  Associations wait and wait for a lender to foreclose and then wait for the sale to bill the new owner (whether lender or third party) for the appropriate amount.  More importantly, Associations need the property to be sold to start collecting assessments from the new owner going forward.  The number of sales canceled at the last minute seems to be on the rise.  This new form requires the lender to explain why they want to cancel the sale.  It also directs the Court to set a new sale date, rather than keeping properties in an "extended limbo between final judgment and sale". [Quote from Task Force]

There are some slight changes to the Final Judgment of Foreclosure that weren't published before so interested persons have sixty (60) days to comment before they become final.  All of the other changes are final and in effect.

Banker's Push for Fast-Track Foreclosures: Capitol Conversation Update

First, a quick note of introduction. As stated above, my name is Travis Moore and for the last number of years I have had the privilege of advocating for the interests of CALL members before Florida's policy makers. This includes the Governor's Office and Executive Branch Agencies such as the Department of Business and Regulation which is charged with condominium oversight and the state Legislature. While decisions are being made in Tallahassee and around the state, it is vitally important the voice of each CALL member is heard by those holding sway over the deliberations. I am pleased to be a part of your team by pointing your megaphone in the most effective direction and being your eyes and ears as the debate affecting our community takes place.

Probably THE hot button issue facing community associations in Florida is mortgage foreclosures and the statutory limit of lender liability for assessments. The association is left maintaining the asset  - the burden on the backs of the units not in foreclosure, but many sliding that way. This added burden is just buttering the slope.

Up until recently, the lending lobby has offered no workable solutions. Now, they are circulating draft legislation creating a non-judicial foreclosure process. To date, no bill has been filed but we suspect it will and CALL will quickly analyze it and get it circulated for your input. Already, we are reviewing the draft so be looking for a CALL Alert soon.

As in any proposal to address this true crisis for associations, there are certain criteria which we will insist on. Obviously it must address the associations' ability to have owners and lenders meet their financial obligations to the association. What is rightfully owed to the association for maintaining the real estate must be paid.  It must be paid as quickly as possible. One of the main issues currently being faced by associations is the length of time it is taking for the property to be foreclosed, while the hard cap of 6 months (COA) and 12 months (HOA) is keeping the lenders' liability unreasonably low. 

It is imperative that any foreclosure process, including a non-judicial one, not put the entire process and timetable under the control of the lender.  The lenders have the most to gain by delay...a cap and avoidance of paying full assessments upon taking title...while leaving associations even further at their "mercy."