• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Johnson Strategies

Planning, Communications, Advocacy

  • Home
  • The JS Story
  • About JS
    • Mission
    • About Scott
    • Writing
  • Videos
  • Library
    • AOB prior to reforms effective July 1, 2019
    • AOB on and after reforms effective July 1, 2019
    • Citizens
    • Legislative Glossary
    • Government Studies and Reports
    • Miscellaneous Documents
    • Presentations and Powerpoints
  • Links
    • Government
    • Other Helpful Sites
  • Contact
You are here: Home / Advocacy / PUBLIC ADJUSTERS—All in the Family

PUBLIC ADJUSTERS—All in the Family

August 11, 2021 - Opinions by Scott Johnson 2 Comments

Speaking of Public Adjusters and the contribution too many of them make to Florida’s property insurance fraud problem, a recent petition delivered to the Department of Financial Services (DFS) may be instructive for those of us paying the highest homeowner premiums in America.

On July 19 DFS received a Petition for Declaratory Statement from Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company.  Basically it asks DFS to opine on whether family relationships some PA’s have with remediation contractors are in violation of Florida Law, specifically portions of Fs-626.8795 Public adjusters; prohibition of conflict of interest; which reads as follows:

A public adjuster may not participate, directly or indirectly, in the reconstruction, repair, or restoration of damaged property that is the subject of a claim adjusted by the licensee; may not engage in any other activities that may be reasonably construed as a conflict of interest, including soliciting or accepting any remuneration from, of any kind or nature, directly or indirectly; and may not have a financial interest in any salvage, repair, or any other business entity that obtains business in connection with any claim that the public adjuster has a contract or an agreement to adjust. [emphasis added]

In its’ petition Universal describes what’s going on:

“A company that provides water mitigation services expands the scope of area damaged by the loss reported citing the need for remediation. These actions include drilling into walls & kitchen cabinets; removal of wood and tile baseboards; removal of walls; and removal of flooring even though the areas were not involved in the loss being reported or exhibiting any actual damages. In certain claims the same mitigation company is also the company used to trench floors even though they did not hold the license to perform the service.

All of this is performed before the claim is even reported to the insurance carrier and subsequently prejudices the ability to determine if a loss occurred or that damages were sustained. In these claims the only supporting evidence that a policyholder presents in support of the loss is the records prepared by the mitigation company which also has a direct relationship with the public adjuster they have contracted. In many incidences my investigation has discovered that the policyholder had no knowledge of the relationship until they had been advised by me. Furthermore, in many incidences we have discovered through the policyholder that the water mitigation company is brought into the claim by the public adjuster themselves or a public adjuster from their public adjusting company they own.

The actions detailed above involves 100’s if not 1,000’s of homeowners throughout the State of Florida.”

The statutory prohibition (and thus the petition), is more consequential when you ponder facts stated in the petition.  Universal cites three PA’s that, as either mother or wife, have a familial relationship with the entity or person responsible for repairing or reconstructing many of the properties upon which the PA has an adjustment contract.  In fact, the petition states the PA hired their family members’ water firm, 45 out of 47 times in one case, 373 out of 393 times in another and for 100% of the claims (243 out of 243 claims) in yet another example.  For just this one carrier!

In my opinion this goes to the heart of Fs-626.8795 as the title purposes it to be a “Prohibition of conflict of interest.”  My recollection is the law was intended to keep PA’s from choosing vendors for reasons other than competency, competitive pricing and the like.  Lawmakers were trying to remove some incentive (or ability) to inflate repair costs as a means to inflate the PA’s percentage-based contingency payment.

Of course I’m not a lawyer.  I do speak English though, and even assuming no communication whatsoever by the PA as a parent or spouse of a remediator, the question is also: does the familial relationship constitute a violation of a statute that states the PA “may not engage in any other activities that may reasonably be construed as a conflict of interest.”  

I’m not sure how else to “construe” hiring your own son 100% of the time if not an activity that could reasonably …[be] a conflict of interest.   And, of course, the concern is amplified if the relationship is one of husband and wife.

But this is all just my lay, and somewhat speculative, opinion.

And it’s certainly not my decision. That belongs solely to DFS.  And just FYI, according to the law governing Declaratory Statements (Chapter 28-105) DFS can take 90 days, choose to hold a hearing or not, then file a Notice of Disposition in the Florida Administrative Register.  Or… it can do as it and other agencies often do and decline to render any Declaratory Statement on the matter. (See Note #1 below)

So, there you have it.

Personally, I believe the facts are true as stated in the petition.  Indeed, I believe that these types of relationships exist much more than we realize, and that they are predominantly with water remediation vendors, as opposed to roofers or contractors.  Regardless of DFS’s findings one way or the other, I believe the existence of these affiliations is one more reason why water remediation firms need regulation.

Please, share your opinion by leaving a “reply” below.  Especially if you’re a lawyer, tell me whether you believe the familial relationships described in the petition violate Fs-626.8795 . Second, after reading “Should We or Should We Not…Regulate Drying Firms?” please share your opinion on that issue as well.

Someday maybe all the pieces will be in place for Florida to be more like other states; especially with regard to the sky high premiums we all must pay.

                                                                                                                                                        ##end##

NOTE #1: The law (Chapter 28-105) provides that “the agency [DFS] may rely on the statements of fact set out in the petition without taking any position with regard to the validity of the facts.”  In other words, DFS is being asked to opine whether it’s a violation of the statute “IF” the alleged affiliations were to exist.  And, finally, based on my inquiries and some limited experience, the most likely response is for DFS to not agree to provide a Declaratory Statement at all.  This, for a variety of potential reasons, including lack of  “standing” by the petitioner.

IMPORTANT: If you enjoyed this post you’re invited to subscribe for automatic notifications by going to: www.johnsonstrategiesllc.com.  Enter your email address where indicated.  If you’re already on the website at Johnson Strategies, LLC, go to the home page and enter your email address on the right-hand side.  Remember, you’ll receive an email confirming your acceptance, so…check and clear your spam filter for notifications from Johnson Strategies, LLC.  ENJOY!

Please view “The Johnson Strategies Story”

 

facebookShare on Facebook
TwitterPost on X
FollowFollow us
PinterestSave

Filed Under: Advocacy

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Mark Boardman says

    August 12, 2021 at 8:49 am

    Your opening statement “Speaking of Public Adjusters and the contribution too many of them make to Florida’s property insurance fraud problem, ”

    This is typical Mr. Johnson lump everybody together through the language you use.

    I want to make it clear as a 40 year public adjuster. I helped established some of the language that you are quoting from the statutes. And I agree that there may be a violation of the moral intent intent of those statutes. I’m not so sure how you can establish something legally.

    Let’s take this one step further how many insurance companies have preferred vendor programs Or in fact they even have financial Ties to the actual contractor that my policy the insurance is required to use.

    How about the establishment insurance companies of administrative companies that handle all of their is there internal paperwork as well as claims claims. And these administrative companies charge extremely high rates for the work they do. And who owns these companies. Please look into that Question.

    Not all public adjusters are in the business of business of trying to cheat the insurance companyMost of us are in the business to keep the insurance company from cheating the insured. Believe me this happens Mr. Johnson.

    Your whole life is supported by insurance companies is that not a conflict of interest?

    Log in to Reply
    • scott says

      August 13, 2021 at 12:31 pm

      Mark: I specifically did not lump every PA in with the comments I made about the “Few Too Many.” who are part of Florida’s fraud problem. I have friends who are PA’s and they agree with me. Even you said “I agree there may be a violation of the moral intent of the statute.” Remember, one of those in the petition had such a moral violation 100% of the time.

      Your point about Insurers using preferred vendors completely misses the point. First, using preferred providers is not against the law, what the PA’s in question are allegedly doing is against the law, at least “morally.” Second, Florida is the only state that has so many preferred providers for property coverage. It’s not because insurers want to use them, but…because of the fraud and abusive practices by contractors and PA’s that makes it necessary in Florida.

      The fee’s charged by the subsidiaries of the carriers that act as MGA’s are scrutinized by the OIR and approved as part of the rate approval process. The water vendors in the petition have no regulation whatsoever & no rate approval process. Besides, the work being done by the carrier’s subsidiary is work that has to be done. Would you feel better if it were being done by insurer employees vs. a wholly owned subsidiary?

      You’re right, most PA’s are not in the business of cheating the insurer. I’m only trying to get rid of the “Few too many” that are. Why don’t you join me in this effort by reporting to me when you see one of them breaking the law, “morally” instead of pointing to the alleged violations of insurers. Anyway, if/when there are such insurer violations,…two wrongs would not make a right.

      My whole life is not supported by insurers. I do not get paid to defend insurers and never have. My whole life has been dedicated to supporting independent insurance agents which often meant doing battle with insurers. My life now is dedicated to helping consumers and the best way to do that is to fight the overwhelming fraud in Florida’s property insurance system, in my opinion.

      Finally, you didn’t answer my question. What do you think about the need for water remediation to be regulated?

      Thanks for responding and for being a subscriber.
      Scott

      Log in to Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Primary Sidebar

Unless otherwise attributed, articles on this site are the opinions of Scott Johnson.

To subscribe to Scott’s blog…

JS Contributors

Don Brown
Particularly on insurance issues, Don Brown brings expert legislative acumen to the JS team. First elected in 2000 he emerged as an architect on numerous insurance related reforms, predominantly Property Insurance. He’s been an independent insurance agent for over 25 years and is currently a sought-after speaker, consultant and author. Learn more
David Thompson, AAI, CPCU, CRIS
David Thompson has a well-deserved reputation across the country as a preeminent expert in the Property & Casualty field. Learn more
Bill Wilson, CPCU, ARM, AIM, AAM
Bill is one of the most respected speakers and writers on P & C issues in the U.S. He is recognized by his peers as someone who can explain complicated technical subjects in an easily understood and interesting fashion. His list of accomplishments and awards is legendary. For good reason his books, articles and consulting services are in continuous demand. Learn more
Barry Zalma, ESQ. CFE
Johnson Strategies has relied upon Mr. Zalma on numerous occasions for his research and insight into matters of insurance fraud, bad faith, relevant case law and expert analysis. Learn more

Order Scott’s Books

Collapse of an Evil Empire

Fraud and greed pushed home insurers to the brink. Something bold had to be done. This is the story of the disbarment of Florida’s most prolific litigator leading to the most comprehensive tort reforms in Florida, and perhaps American, history.

What's Past is Prologue

Lessons from the Worst Insurance Crisis in Florida’s History... ASSIGNMENT OF BENEFITS

Fact & Fallacy

Essays & Opinions on Florida's Most Controversial Insurance Topics.

Platforms of Success

What the New Generation of Elite Sellers are Doing and How it Can Work for You!

From Cartels to Competition

The Evolution of Insurance and the History of Florida’s Independent Agent

Recent blog posts

  • AGENTS, ADJUSTERS, INSURERS BEWARE—THE RED FLAGS OF FRAUD!
  • The Delicate Balance: Addressing MGA Concerns Without Creating Market Uncertainty
  • Are Florida’s MGA’s Under Attack?!
  • A Smarter Approach to Hurricane-Resilient Homes and Insurance Stability…
  • How Do Other Jurisdictions Manage Hurricane Risk Exposure?

Blog Archive

  • April 2025 (1)
  • March 2025 (2)
  • February 2025 (2)
  • January 2025 (2)
  • October 2024 (3)
  • September 2024 (2)
  • August 2024 (2)
  • May 2024 (1)
  • January 2024 (1)
  • October 2023 (4)
  • September 2023 (2)
  • April 2023 (1)
  • March 2023 (2)
  • February 2023 (3)
  • January 2023 (1)
  • December 2022 (2)
  • November 2022 (1)
  • August 2022 (2)
  • July 2022 (1)
  • June 2022 (1)
  • May 2022 (2)
  • March 2022 (4)
  • February 2022 (3)
  • January 2022 (3)
  • November 2021 (2)
  • October 2021 (3)
  • September 2021 (1)
  • August 2021 (3)
  • July 2021 (4)
  • April 2021 (5)
  • March 2021 (3)
  • February 2021 (6)
  • January 2021 (6)
  • December 2020 (2)
  • October 2020 (3)
  • September 2020 (2)
  • August 2020 (2)
  • July 2020 (1)
  • June 2020 (2)
  • April 2020 (1)
  • March 2020 (1)
  • February 2020 (1)
  • January 2020 (1)
  • August 2019 (2)
  • June 2019 (1)
  • March 2019 (1)
  • January 2019 (1)
  • December 2018 (1)
  • November 2018 (1)
  • September 2018 (1)
  • July 2018 (1)
  • June 2018 (2)
  • October 2017 (2)
  • September 2017 (1)
  • August 2017 (1)
  • June 2017 (1)
  • April 2017 (2)
  • March 2017 (2)
  • February 2017 (1)
  • December 2016 (1)
  • October 2016 (1)
  • August 2016 (2)
  • July 2016 (1)
  • June 2016 (1)
  • March 2016 (2)
  • February 2016 (1)
  • January 2016 (2)
  • November 2015 (1)
  • October 2015 (1)
  • September 2015 (1)
  • August 2015 (2)
  • July 2015 (2)
  • June 2015 (2)
  • May 2015 (1)
  • April 2015 (2)
  • March 2015 (1)
  • February 2015 (3)
  • January 2015 (1)
  • December 2014 (2)
  • November 2014 (4)
  • October 2014 (1)
  • September 2014 (2)
  • August 2014 (2)
  • July 2014 (2)
  • June 2014 (2)
  • May 2014 (3)
  • April 2014 (2)
  • March 2014 (3)
  • February 2014 (3)
  • January 2014 (2)
  • December 2013 (2)
  • November 2013 (2)
  • October 2013 (2)
  • September 2013 (2)
  • August 2013 (2)
  • July 2013 (3)
  • June 2013 (2)
  • May 2013 (3)
  • April 2013 (2)
  • March 2013 (3)
  • February 2013 (5)
  • January 2013 (2)
  • December 2012 (4)
  • November 2012 (3)
  • October 2012 (4)
  • August 2012 (5)
  • July 2012 (5)
  • June 2012 (4)
  • May 2012 (3)
  • April 2012 (7)
  • March 2012 (3)
  • February 2012 (3)
  • January 2012 (5)
  • December 2011 (6)
  • November 2011 (7)
  • October 2011 (6)
  • September 2011 (2)
  • August 2011 (7)
  • July 2011 (7)
  • June 2011 (4)
  • May 2011 (4)

Tag Cloud

7-7-7 Plan Citizens Insurance oir Rick Scott sb-480 senator fasano senator richter
Unless otherwise attributed, articles on this site are the opinions of Scott Johnson.

Mission: Satisfaction Guaranteed

Johnson Strategies (JS) works to establish and achieve goals promoting products or idea's to customers, state policymakers and the consuming public. This is done on behalf of both corporate and individual clients, non-profit trade associations and membership societies. JS specializes in planning, communication and advocacy for a wide range of interests focused in the property and casualty insurance field. Our simple mission is to guarantee satisfaction based on a comprehensive needs analysis and mutually defined goals.

Categories

Popular Tags

7-7-7 Plan Citizens Insurance oir Rick Scott sb-480 senator fasano senator richter

Post Calendar

May 2025
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Apr    

Recent Posts

  • AGENTS, ADJUSTERS, INSURERS BEWARE—THE RED FLAGS OF FRAUD!
  • The Delicate Balance: Addressing MGA Concerns Without Creating Market Uncertainty
  • Are Florida’s MGA’s Under Attack?!
  • A Smarter Approach to Hurricane-Resilient Homes and Insurance Stability…
  • How Do Other Jurisdictions Manage Hurricane Risk Exposure?
  • PART II of “What Agents Need to Know About Public Adjusters…
  • Latest Decision on AOB!

[footer_backtotop]

Copyright 2012, Johnson Strategies LLC. Website design/development by Cali Design LLC