The following report is from JS expert contributor Bill Wilson, CPCU, ARM, AIM, AAM. It’s offered here with a link to the original paper written by Philadelphia attorney, Randy Maniloff. Together, Wilson’s article and Maniloff’s paper, provide a succinct legal explanation for why COVID-19 is widely considered by the courts as not covered under most Business Interruption policies. I thought there would be many readers of my blog who would like to keep this handy for discussions with clients regarding COVID-19 coverage issues.
Archives for January 2022
Late last year I failed to report that the fight against Assignment of Benefits (AOB) took another hopeful step forward.
Recall the reforms of 2019 in which new requirements were placed on AOB’s? As helpful as they were, they were not an outright prohibition as some thought. Instead HB-7065 made the use of AOB’s less likely and provided safeguards against consumer abuse. These safeguards, including improvements to the one-way attorney fee statute, were intended to reduce invoice inflation, massive fraud and mounds of frivolous litigation. The operative language restricted AOB’s to emergency work which is the lesser of $3,000 or 1% of Coverage A. (See NOTE #1 below)
Lawmakers just got back in town–hopefully they’ll devote necessary time to triage Florida’s immobilized property market. Such should include some badly needed new approaches as well as cauterizing past reform efforts, 2019’s HB 7065 and 2021’s SB-76.
Since last year’s session, litigation has only tightened its strangle hold on Florida’s property system–fueling speculation that our insurance market is being (has been) displaced by a $4.5 billion litigation market. [Read more…] about Attention Florida Lawmakers–PART I