Archives for July 2011

“CHOICES”… new site, old problems.

The OIR just announced a  “re-launch” of its homeowners rate comparison website penned CHOICES; for, Consumer Home Owners Insurance Comparison Electronic System. Like its predecessor, “Shop & Compare”, CHOICES displays premiums by county for “selected” companies including Citizens, then; ranks them from lowest to highest. Also, like its predecessor, CHOICES may cause even more shoppers to ask “where are my choices?” Or worse…”Why is Citizens my only choice?” [Read more…]


It may have happened before but, I wasn’t in the room.  During a televised OIR rate hearing this week, a major Florida homeowners carrier was criticized for, get ready…requesting too little of an increase! Yep, it’s true.  And guess who was doing the criticizing?  [Read more…]

Public Adjusters & SB-408–Blog Responses

I received many reply’s to my last blog regarding SB-408’s impact on public adjusters (Pop Some Bubbly?).  Most could not be published but, I did allow several that were critical of both my motives and manhood to appear, along with my responses.  [Read more…]

Public Adjusters & SB-408–Pop Some Bubbly?

It’s hardly a secret the insurance industry would prefer having no Public Adjusters (PA’s) or certainly, having far fewer of them. Despite disappointment by some about this years’ bill (SB-408) with respect to PA’s generally, I think there’ll be cause to pop some bubbly in the not-too-distant future. [Read more…]


Okay, I’m gonna go out on a limb here. I don’t understand what’s going on with this “new” (so called) idea of privatizing Citizens. Nor do I think those proposing it understand what they’re proposing. [Read more…]

Sessions ’11 & ’12–Like Night and Day

I was reminded of the difference between last year’s legislative accomplishments and what’s likely to be accomplished in 2012 when OIR recently published its summary of the 2011 insurance bills.  You may want to check it out,  as it not only covers “all” insurance bills, property and otherwise but, also contains a brief explanation from Kevin McCarty on why his office endorsed SB-408. [Read more…]

COURT DECISION ON SINKHOLES–Structural Damage Retroactivity

SB-408 contained language intended to limit sinkhole losses by “clarifying” legislative intent with respect to the term “structural damage”.  Known to most in the industry is that structural damage was being alleged with most any visible damage–cracks, discoloration, crevices, windows that were difficult to close, minor stucco damage, settlement and so forth.

[Read more…]