Props to DeSantis/Senate for tort reform in regards to Florida insurance

Is the argument that other states don't have lawyers (or don't have zealous lawyers)? Or that our Republican-dominated legislature is too generous to the plaintiffs' attorneys? Because neither is particularly believable.

I can't speak to whether the woman is hurt or not. But my grandfather was in a car accident years ago. He thought he was fine. The paramedics thought he was fine. He went home. A couple days later, he was feeling really bad, went to the hospital, and they discovered that he had fractured his neck in the car accident. All this to say, I don't make assumptions on how injured people are right after an accident when adrenaline is flowing.

 

“The skyrocketing cost of insurance premiums in Florida is leading residents to drop their insurance, consider selling their home, and even move out of the state, “

Florida residents flee state as insurance premiums skyrocket up to 900%

 

People are fleeing the state because they pay $2k more per year for home insurance? I highly doubt it.

 

I don't know the answer either. But we've had plenty of "tort reform." The people in power in Tallahassee have been hostile towards plaintiffs' lawyers for years. If that was the fix, the problem would be solved.

 

The main cause of the premium increases is the roofing scam that is still prevalent in Florida. Unscrupulous contractors will go door-to-door after a “high wind event” (which could be a typical afternoon thunderstorm) and basically offer homeowners free roofs, even if there is no visible damage or if the roofs are near the end of their useful life, because they and the homeowners attorneys know the insurance companies likely won’t fight the claim. I have a buddy who just got a free new 50K tile roof (even though he had no leaks and his original roof was well over 20 years old) that was done by a contractor with an actual website roofspaidbyinsurance.com.

Obviously the hurricanes that have hit Florida the last few years have caused major issues but until the state figures out the roofing scam that is rampant throughout the entire state, premiums will continue to rise.

 

They passed a law months ago that was supposed to put a stop to the "roofing scam."

 

I don't need to sue my insurance company. I need to afford my house payments. Currently shopping for new insurance after the policies I had all doubled this year with no competition.

I now pay more in escrow than for the rest of the house payment + interest, this with a 15 year loan.

I have never even filed a claim over the past 6 years of having this policy.

 

Because that worked out so well with HB7065 in 2019?

 

I had to go to Citizens at a 33+% premium increase because my insurer pulled out and nobody else would insure me. Paid to replace my own roof out of pocket because of its age. Ridiculous how bad things are.

 

I assure you whatever was done hasn’t worked. Live in an area which had a recent wind event of over 60 mph (as documented by NOAA) and you will have roofers canvassing those areas telling homeowners that if they allow them to just inspect their roof they can basically get you a free replacement (whether there is actual damage or not).

What the legislature did last year was primarily to deal with the different issue of insurance companies telling their clients that in order to renew their policy, they would need to replace their existing roof even if it did not leak and/or still had warranty life from the manufacturer.

 

So I am going to give a story that I have not researched and not sure I can find the answer and deals more with Auto. As a quick search pits insurance verse PIP attorneys. I am sure the truth lies in the middle. But I did find a quick piece that addressed what my insurance agent said…

I met with my agent after being rear ended and we got discussing insurance and cost which led to a discussion on the new law.

Apparently attorneys would use a multiplier for fees in their cases. The new law went to something called the Lodestar Fee as sufficient and reasonable which took away the multiplier. Apparently we had a massive dump of cases (presumably so PIP attorneys could not multiply their fees once the law went into effect). He said 250K in one day?!? From an insurance lobby person he had met with. Also mentioned that the court apparently with auto said that policies would fall under the law based on when they were first effective. So my understanding was if your auto policy renewed before the law PIP attorneys would be able to charge the multiplier until it renewed after the law went into effect.

If that stuff is correct. This law was a good step imo. I am sure the PIP attorneys disagree. And there may be ignorance here that is fair. So I am all ears as I think this should be public and open so everyone understands what is going on. Not the behind the door stuff.

For any PIP attorneys out there. Is this correct? Were you able to charge a multiplier? If so why?

And for any Insurance friends. Is this correct from what you have heard from your side?

 

My understanding of the bill is that it was supposed to enact tort reform to make it harder to sue and harder for attorneys to recover fees and costs in order to give insurers more ability to deny claims. The goal of that was in part to kneecap the roofing scams.

 

No, but it will increase insurance company profits. To think that legislation will lower premiums is naive.

 

You got some REALLY bad information. Most of what you were told was nonsense. There was a huge rush to file cases before the law took effect.

 

So what is the real story? I acknowledge it was from the insurance side. You are the attorney side. Were you able to charge a multiplier? If so why? Why was there a rush to file cases before the law went into effect?

I am not taking a side on this really.