Some Potential Sunshine for Florida’s Property Insurance Market 

By Matthew Scarfone, Esq., Triple-I blog contributor, and shareholder at Colodny Fass 

Florida presents property insurers with a unique set of factors that affect the availability and affordability of insurance coverage. The state boasts the third-largest population in America while simultaneously enduring a higher-than-average volume of natural disasters. It’s fair to say that operating a residential insurance company in the Sunshine State isn’t for the faint of heart.

What’s behind the mounting catastrophe in the Florida legal system?

But as damaging as the hurricanes can be, there is a man-made disaster that has contributed significantly to destabilizing the market to concerning levels: legal system abuse. In practice, some people are misusing tools of the justice system to manipulate outcomes and obtain windfalls. Insurance carriers have paid a heavy price in recent years due to the increased abuse of one-way attorney fees, bad faith claims, and other unsustainable litigation trends. 

Exploitation of one-way attorney fees and bad faith law has been especially prevalent. Until recently, if a policyholder or third party sued an insurer and obtained any monetary award, they were entitled to recover all attorney fees incurred in the litigation. This practice may have incentivized people to dispute insurance claims, regardless of whether they were justified.  

The problem was further exacerbated by the abuse of assignment of benefits (AOB) agreements, which created an opportunity for contractors to inflate costs. As a result, a modest homeowners insurance claim could lead to multiple lawsuits by different assignees, each asserting a separate claim for attorney fees. Manipulating this loophole encouraged excessive claims and unreasonable demands, forcing insurers to choose between paying the inflated bill or risking a lengthy trial where the attorney fees alone could exceed the claim amount. On top of that, courts have had broad discretion to apply fee multipliers and can award 1.5-3 times the reasonable attorney fee. 

Cases involving allegations of bad faith further compound an insurer’s exposure because these cases can be costly to defend and involve intrusive discovery, amorphous damages, and unpredictable juries. Bad faith cases are not ripe (i.e., ready to potentially warrant judicial intervention) until there has been a final determination regarding coverage and the damage amount. Therefore, insurers regularly face the prospect of defending a bad faith case even after resolving the underlying dispute.  

Florida’s courts did not help matters by ruling that appraisal awards—tools designed to help resolve disputes—could lay the procedural groundwork for bad faith actions. In other words, after resolving a claim through appraisal, insurers could still be left to defend a lawsuit for bad faith. Some attorneys used this caselaw as a playbook to fast-track claims into bad faith litigation by misusing the appraisal process. 

The problem looks even worse when you quantify it. According to the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation (OIR), as of 2020, despite Florida only accounting for 9% of all homeowners insurance claims in the country, it accounted for 79% of all homeowner insurance litigation nationwide. Additionally, over the last decade, only 8% of the $51 billion paid out by insurers went to claimants, yet plaintiffs’ attorneys took home 71%. Meanwhile, eleven Florida property insurers fell into liquidation since 2017—five of those occurring last year alone. 

Legislators recognized need for urgent action to help curb costs of insurance claims.

The Florida Legislature has responded to the growing crisis by passing multiple pieces of significant insurance reform, primarily tackling the problems with AOBs, bad faith claims, and excessive fees.  For example, the new laws eliminate one-way attorney fees in property insurance litigation, forbids using appraisal awards to file a bad faith lawsuit, and prohibits vendors from taking AOBs under new policies. Despite criticism from the plaintiffs’ bar, these reforms are not all “one-sided.” Recently passed legislation also ensures transparency and efficiency in the claims process and encourages a more efficient and less costly alternative to litigation.  

While it’s too soon to know exactly how recent reforms will improve the state’s insurance market, there is a sense of hope that these measures will decrease the volume of property insurance litigation and foster a more viable and stable residential insurance market that enables greater consumer access to affordable coverage. 

It may take time for these reforms to have a measurable impact on Florida’s property insurance market. Still, insurers and policyholders alike should be optimistic that the market is headed in a more sustainable direction. 

Beyond Fire: Triple-I Interview Unravels Lightning-Risk Complexity

Lightning is a more complex peril than it is often given credit for being, according to Tim Harger, executive director of the Lightning Protection Institute (LPI). In a recent interview with Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan, Harger discussed the importance of preparing for and preventing damage from this risk, which is second only to flooding when it comes to costly weather events.

People typically think about fire damage when they think about lightning. But Harger said, “Beyond the fire is the destruction of electrical wires and infrastructure that supports everything we do to communicate and to conduct business.”

If lighting strikes any of these structures, he said, “Activity is stopped.”

Harger cited the case of an East Coast furniture manufacturer that was struck.

“That one lightning strike cost them just over a million dollars in damage,” he said. “Yes, there was the typical fire that caused structural damage, but what was impacted on the ‘inside’ was even more costly. They had damaged inventory, production downtime, and loss of revenue during the repairs.”

Investment in a lightning protection system could have saved this business owner – and his insurer – the million dollars lost and prevented business interruption. Nearly $1 billion in lightning claims was paid out in 2018 to almost 78,000 policy holders, according to LPI.

“Lightning strikes about a 100 times every second,” Harger said. “When installed properly, lightning protection systems are scientifically proven to mitigate the risks of a lightning strike.”

 A lightning protection system consists of six parts: 

  • Strike termination device,
  • Conductors,
  • Grounding,
  • Surge protection,
  • Potential equalization, and
  • Inspection. 

Architects and engineers play an important role in specifying and designing these systems, and installation is completed by certified lightning protection contractors. When properly installed lightning is intercepted by the strike termination device and energy is routed through the conductors and into the grounding system, preventing impact to the structure or electrical infrastructure.

“Businesses already install fire alarms and sprinkler systems to mitigate greater risks of fires,” Harger said. “Lightning protection systems prevent a lightning strike from causing any damage. So the investment in a lightning protection system prevents personal injury and the costly impact of even one strike.”

Several insurers offer premium discounts for policyholders who invest in lightning protection systems. LPI invites insurance providers who are interested in sharing their customer incentives to contact them at lpi@lightning.org.

Michigan No-Fault Reform Yields Fewer Claims, Lower Premiums

By Max Dorfman, Research Writer, Triple-I

Michigan’s no-fault system reform law, effective in 2020, has led to personal auto insurers paying out fewer claims and many drivers paying less in premiums, according to recent research by two Triple-I nonresident scholars.

The study, No Fault Auto Insurance Reform in Michigan: An Initial Assessment, co-authored by Patricia Born, Ph.D. of Florida State University and Robert Klein, Ph.D. of Temple University, observed substantial decreases in average liability premiums and personal injury protection (PIP) loss costs in 2022. PIP covers the treatment of injuries to the driver and passengers of the policyholder’s car in a no-fault auto insurance system. 

“Our initial evaluation of the likely effects of the reform legislation indicates that it is significantly reducing the costs of auto insurance for many Michigan drivers,” the paper states. “How much these reductions will be for any given driver will depend on the PIP option they choose, among other factors.”

The average Michigan policyholder paid $2,611 annually for personal auto insurance coverage in 2019 and $2,133 in 2022, an 18 percent decrease, according to Insure.com. Before the state’s no-fault auto insurance system reform law took effect in July 2020, Michigan regularly ranked as one of the costliest states in the U.S. for personal auto insurance coverage.

The 2020 reform law’s enactment allowed for:

  • Reducing auto insurer payouts of high PIP medical benefits;
  • Instituting medical cost controls;
  • Broadening the state’s authority to regulate personal auto insurance rate filings;
  • Creating a Fraud Investigation Unit within the Department of Insurance and Financial Services; and
  • Restricting auto insurer use of “non-driving” rating factors (e.g., credit-based insurance scores).

Michigan was the only state to offer unlimited medical benefits through the PIP portion of an auto insurance policy. Insurers also were severely constrained in controlling the medical costs arising from PIP claims. This cost contributed to more than one in four drivers (26 percent) on Michigan’s roadways being uninsured in 2019, the Insurance Research Council (IRC) estimated, nearly twice the national average (13 percent). Michigan is one of 12 no-fault states in the U.S. These systems allow policyholders to file claims with their own insurer after an accident, regardless of whom caused the accident. No-fault states restrict lawsuits to serious cases and promote faster claim payouts. 

Learn More:

IRC Releases State Auto Insurance Affordability Rankings

Why Personal Auto Insurance Rates Are Likely to Keep Rising

Triple-I Issues Brief: Personal Auto Insurance Rates