Claims And Issues

I'M AN AMERICAN. NOW I'M AN AMERICAN IN A HURRICANE.

Hurricane Seen From Space (NASA)

 

I Am An American.

My name is Wall.

My name is Cortez.

My name is Murphy.

My name is D'Angelo.

My name is Floyd.

My name is Korematsu.

My name is America.

We do not have one name.  We have many names.  We do not have one skin color.  We do not have one religion.  We have many.

We are America.  We are many and we are one.

Now I Am An American in a Hurricane.

I have been an American in a metaphorical Hurricane for a long time.  Bright times are ahead.

By the time you read this, I will be an American in a real Hurricane and we may have been without power for a couple of days.  Bright times are ahead. 

Pray for me anyway.

Thanks.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2022 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

KAISER HEALTH PODCAST: GETTING TO "YES" WHEN INSURER SAYS "NO."

Hurricane Season has begun in Florida.  We are still in the grip of a plague called COVID-19.  This Kaiser Health News Podcast by Dan Weissman, published June 14, 2021, explores the ways of Getting to "Yes" When Your Insurance Company Says "NO" to Your Claim.

We don't often link to podcasts on this blog, but this one is an exception to the rule in many ways.

P.S.  You can ignore the customary "Cookies" disclaimer and keep reading or listening.  I did.

Please read the disclaimer.  This blog article ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

FLORIDA DISASTER RELIEF? IT'S BUYING CAGES AT THE TEXAS BORDER.

Hurricane Dorian is heading to Florida as I am writing these words.  What happened to the disaster relief fund?

The current regime is using it to buy cages at the Texas border.  See Caitlin Emma, DHS to Siphon $155M in Disaster Aid to Bolster Immigration Enforcement, POLITICO posted on Tuesday, August 27, 2019.

Download CI 08.30.19

Please Read The Disclaimer. ©2019 Dennis J. Wall.  All Rights Reserved.

WIND 2019: LET THE CONFERENCE BEGIN!

On its website, the Windstorm Insurance Network (WIND) describes itself as "the only member association to bring together both defense and policyholder professionals to connect, learn, and engage on important topics in the property/windstorm insurance claims industry."  I will be taking a look myself this week.

Starting tomorrow, Thursday the last day of January in 2019, and scheduled to continue on Friday, February 1, 2019, I will be attending the sessions I signed up for a couple of months ago.  They include catastrophe claims handling and Hurricane damages coverages.  I would like to meet up with many participants especially the defense and policyholder professionals that make up the announced membership of WIND, in other words, the people who represent the people who make and deny insurance claims every day but especially after Hurricanes and earthquakes and wildfires.

The 20th Annual Windstorm Insurance Conference is set for Jan. ​30 - Feb. 2, 2019 at the Walt Disney ​Dolphin Resort.  (I will not be staying there.  I will drive back and forth from my home in the Orlando area.  It's a lot less expensive.)

Please Read The Disclaimer.  ©2019 Dennis J. Wall.  All Rights Reserved.

Webinars About to Start for Consumer and Tenant Lawyers!

The Florida Bar Public Interest Law Section's Consumer and Tenant Working Group of the Florida Bar is putting on webinars starting soon!  These webinars are intended for consumer and tenant attorneys.

Here is a link to the first webinar coming up soon, titled Representing Consumers and Tenants when Hurricanes or other States of Emergency Happen on Wednesday, July 25, 2018:  

https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6051705794319507201 

Thanks for your interest!

FIFTY YEARS LATER AND OUR BIG CONCERN IS HURRICANE COVERAGE?

Don't have an experienced insurance coverage lawyer, or just want to check out the information about hurricane coverage?  See Alexander Nicoli, "What to Know About Your Insurance Before Hurricane Damage Strikes" (posted on The Street online, June 4, 2018).

Please Read The Disclaimer.  © 2018 Dennis J. Wall.  All Rights Reserved.

NOTE TO HARVEY, IRMA & MARIA: "FLOOD" INCLUDES BROKEN WATER MAIN.

A first-party property insurance policy containing both specified perils or multiperils coverages, and specified perils or multiperils exclusions, if you will, was not rendered ambiguous as a result, in Comley v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., NO. 2016-CA-001305-MR, 2017 WL 4448528 (Ky. Ct. App. October 6, 2017; Stated Not Final And Not to be Cited As Authority in Kentucky Courts).

The facts of that case center around a water main outside the plaintiff's property.  The water main broke and inundated plaintiff's-policyholder's house and personal property with damage.  Kentucky's intermediate appellate court held that the water damage exclusion for a "flood" did not require natural causes in order for the exclusion to apply.

Accordingly, the policy at bar was not ambiguous and the policyholder's claimed damage was excluded "water damage," the Kentucky Court of Appeals held in that case.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2018 OPEN ENROLLMENT RUNS FROM NOVEMBER 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 15.  READY?

If you or your clients do not have health insurance coverage, check out and sign up at www.healthcare.gov.

You may not have heard the word that health care coverage is available -- right now, today, even as you read these words.  It's your right.  It's the law of the land!

Please Read The Disclaimer.  ©2017 by Dennis J. Wall.  All Rights Reserved.

POSTSCRIPT TO THE FLORIDA NURSING HOME STORY.

In a postscript to the story of the Florida nursing home concerning liability insurance coverage questions for various actors, the Florida governor's office says that all the calls to the governor's cellphone for help during Irma were returned.

We cannot listen to the calls themselves, actually. The calls were recorded.

But they have been deleted.

All the calls were returned though, the governor's office says. And anyway, they say, the calls did not indicate an emergency. See Caitlin Ostroff, "Voicemails From Nursing Home Where 11 Died Were Deleted by Governor's Office" (Tampa Bay Times online, posted on Monday, September 25, 2017).

As noted in the previous articles posted here, for its part the nursing home reportedly says no, its calls for help were not answered. Read the hyperlinked sources in the previous articles posted here. You can see for yourself whether what the nursing home says that it said in its voicemail messages, reflected an emergency, or not. Parenthetically, the nursing home also says that it also called 911. In a statement, the Florida governor's office says in effect that was too late and no-one should confuse the Florida governor's cellphone with 911. See Kirby Wilson, "Rick Scott Fires Back at Critics in Statement on Hollywood Nursing Home Deaths" (Tampa Bay Times online, posted Tuesday, September 26, 2017). The linked article appends a copy of the Florida governor's office's statement. A review of the statement does not reflect why exactly the Florida governor did give out his cellphone number.

Other people made calls and left voicemails at the Florida governor's cellphone about the overheated conditions facing the residents of the Florida nursing home. No clear word yet on whether the calls that other people made to the governor's cellphone, in addition to the calls made by the nursing home itself, reflected the emergency at the nursing home during Irma, but since all the calls have all been deleted, we cannot listen to any of them, apparently.

Please Read The Disclaimer. ©2017 by Dennis J. Wall. All Rights Reserved.

DEATH AND COVERAGE IN FLORIDA: A CONTINUING STORY.

First installment, "They Called But No-One Came:  Liability Insurance Coverage Questions":  Monday, 09.18.17.  The second of three installments focused on liability insurance coverage questions regarding the Florida power company, "IS YOUR GENERATOR WORKING?" also at http://insuranceclaimsissues.typepad.com/insurance_claims_and_issu/2017/09/is-your-generator-working-the-first-installment-they-called-but-no-one-came-liability-insurance-coverage-questions-monda.html .  In this the final installment, we will address liability insurance coverage questions concerning the Florida nursing home.

Here is the story that continues to develop behind our insurance coverage questions.  I cautioned from the beginning of the first installment that this is a developing story,  that we do not know all the facts, and that much more remains to be reported as time goes on.

Those cautions have been borne out in the past week since I posted my first article in this series.  There are now eleven people who reportedly died after Hurricane Irma struck Florida and specifically struck a Florida nursing home.   The nursing home's air conditioning went out.  It got hot.  Very hot.

Eleven people have died from the heat.

A number of people and corporations played a role in this story.  Together we addressed liability insurance coverage questions regarding the Florida governor in the first installment, and in the second installment we addressed some liability insurance coverage questions surrounding the Florida power company.  In this last installment, together we will address liability insurance coverage questions involving the Florida nursing home.  To write again what I wrote at the outset:  What follows is from the reporting so far on what happened.   The reporting is not complete even now.  There are competing stories on lots of points.  As yet, only some things have been finalized, but they are enough to see the outlines of some important liability insurance coverage questions.

The focus of this series of articles is not on whether there may be any good claims of potential liability, but on whether there are claims to potential liability insurance coverage.

1. The Florida nursing home: Questions of Liability.

The Florida nursing home seems to be a target of opportunity for placing blame on what went wrong at the nursing home that resulted in eleven people dying when the nursing home's air conditioning failed during Hurricane Irma.  Yet it should never be overlooked that there are many actors in this play.

"Somewhere in between, the misery of a nursing home teetering toward tragedy was reported to every official channel, but no attempt was made to transfer the residents to a safer place, or even to the air-conditioned hospital practically next door."  Ellen Gabler, Sheri Fink & Vivian Yee, "At Florida Nursing Home, Many Calls for Help, But None That Made a Difference" (New York Times online, posted Saturday, September 23, 2017), also available at https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/23/us/nursing-home-deaths.html?hpw&rref=us&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=well-region&region=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well.

After so many people died, the Florida governor insisted that his Florida Agency for Health Care Administration adopt emergency rules requiring nursing homes to have backup generators.  But that is not the way it was before Irma and before so many people died.

There were calls to require emergency backup generators at Florida nursing homes long before Hurricane Irma was a little breeze somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean.  The expense of operating a Florida nursing home caused these calls to go without any meaningful response.  To put it another way, money talked and people in power listened.

"Very few nursing homes had generators powerful enough to keep the air-conditioning running. In 2006, Florida lawmakers considered requiring nursing homes to maintain generators to ensure comfortable temperatures during disasters. But the industry raised concerns about the cost, according to The Miami Herald, and the bill died. Last week, after the Hollywood Hills deaths, Mr. Scott announced new rules requiring those generators."  Ellen Gabler, Sheri Fink & Vivian Yee, New York Times supra.

Certainly, the Florida nursing home is experiencing its share of allegations that it was either the sole cause or a contributing cause of these people's horrible deaths.  The current owners of the Florida nursing home have run a facility that received below-average ratings from Medicare even before Irma.  And they have experienced allegations related to Medicare and nursing homes before Irma, as well, including allegations of kickbacks.  See Ellen Gabler, Sheri Fink & Vivian Yee, New York Times supra (reporting that the current owners of the Florida nursing home "were among defendants who paid $15.4 million in 2006 to settle federal and state civil claims that they had paid kickbacks to doctors in exchange for patient admissions.").

No evidence of previous wrongdoing including kickbacks, even if admissible, would prove the allegations of wrongdoing now.  What evidence there is to prove the allegations now will depend in the end on what evidence is uncovered or introduced in the inevitable lawsuits that are the result of these tragic deaths.  See, e.g., "Report:  Before Deaths, Nursing Home Called Rick Scott's Emergency Number Three Times, To No Avail" (Tampa Bay Times staff, posted online on Friday, September 15, 2017), also available at http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/report-nursing-home-called-rick-scotts-emergency-number-three-times-to-no/2337665.

("On Friday, a Miami law firm filed a complaint against the Hollywood facility ....); "'Red Flag' Calls Signaled Post-Irma Deaths at Nursing Home" (Associated Press copyrighted story published online in The New York Times on Saturday, September 16, 2017), also accessible at https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/09/16/us/ap-us-hurricane-irma-nursing-home-deaths-.html (reporting that a family member of a surviving resident "hired an attorney after her 93-year-old mother became severely dehydrated on Wednesday.").

Our focus here remains on the liability insurance coverage questions arising from this tragedy.  In this final installment of a continuing series of articles, our particular focus here is on liability insurance coverage questions which confront the Florida nursing home.

2. Liability Insurance Coverage Questions and the Florida nursing home.

The liability insurance coverage questions surrounding the Florida nursing home in this circumstance are similar to the liability insurance coverage questions that surround the Florida power company which were previously asked here.

The questions that follow are not all the questions that can or will be raised concerning the Florida nursing home's liability insurance coverages.  Some of these questions may not apply.

"Occurrence":  Was there an accident neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the insured, in this instance, neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the Florida nursing home?  This is where the history of Medicare inspections and evaluations of the Florida nursing home may prove relevant.

In the context of Directors and Officers coverage if any for the operators of the Florida nursing home:  Is there any covered conduct at issue on the part of the Florida nursing home's directors and officers?  Alternatively or additionally, is any potentially "covered conduct" excluded because of the availability of liability insurance coverage, if any, under other liability insurance policies available to the directors and officers?

The number of occurrences, if any.  Was there one or were there 11 or more "occurrences," if any?  Was there one occurrence (if any) because, say, there was at least arguably one practice and procedure at the Florida nursing home which resulted in the damages that might be complained of here?  Or were there at least 11 occurrences (again, if any) because so far 11 people have died?  Or if there were any occurrences under the insurance policies at issue, were there more than 11, counting all the people who were injured but who have not died?

Time will tell, and it bears repeating:   Over time the answers to liability insurance coverage questions like these will likely be given by the Florida courts.

Please Read The Disclaimer.  ©2017 by Dennis J. Wall.  All Rights Reserved.

"IS YOUR GENERATOR WORKING?"

The first installment, "They Called But No-One Came: Liability Insurance Coverage Questions": Monday, 09.18.17. This is the second of three installments. This installment will address liability insurance coverage questions regarding the Florida power company. In the final installment, we will address liability insurance coverage questions concerning the Florida nursing home.

Here is the story behind our insurance coverage questions:

Eight people died in a nursing home in Hollywood, Florida during Hurricane Irma. The nursing home's air conditioning went out. It got hot. Very hot.

Eight people died from the heat.

A number of people and corporations played a role in this story. We addressed liability insurance coverage questions regarding the Florida governor on Monday, and today we address some liability insurance coverage questions surrounding the Florida power company. Our last installment will address liability insurance coverage questions involving the Florida nursing home. Their continuing stories will be featured here throughout the coming week, along with their related liability insurance coverage questions.

What follows is from the reporting so far on what happened.  The reporting is not complete even now. There are competing stories on lots of points. As yet, only some things have been finalized, enough to see the outlines of some important liability insurance coverage questions.

The focus of this series of articles is not on whether there may be any good claims of potential liability, but on whether there are claims to potential liability insurance coverage.

1. The Florida power company: Questions of Liability.

Eight people died in a nursing home in Florida when the air conditioning went out. "Survival also depended on phone tag between nursing-home administrators, state officials and utility providers." Aaron Davis, Katie Zezima & Mark Berman, "Officials at Nursing Home Where 8 Died Say They Called Florida Gov. Rick Scott 3 Times For Help" (Washington Post via Chicago Tribune posted on Friday, September 15, 2017), also available at http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-florida-nursing-home-deaths-rick-scott-20170915-story.html.

The nursing home called the power company when a transformer blew out and the air conditioning stopped. This was the first of several calls the Florida nursing home says it made to the Florida power company. "Report: Before Deaths, Nursing Home Called Rick Scott's Emergency Number Three Times, To No Avail" (Tampa Bay Times staff, posted online on Friday, September 15, 2017), also available at http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/report-nursing-home-called-rick-scotts-emergency-number-three-times-to-no/2337665.

The Washington Post report via the Chicago Tribune linked above reflects that "[t]he nursing home provided ticket numbers for service requests that it had placed with" the Florida power company. "The Post was able to confirm two of the requests using state records and the utility's website." Id.

The same reporting further reveals what was not widely reported previously: The nursing home personnel were not the only ones who called the Florida power company. At least one relative of a nursing home resident, perhaps joined by others, "repeatedly called" the power company. "I told [the power company] the generators were going to give up soon. And it happened." Id. [Emphasis added.]

Finally, people also called 911, more than once, before anyone died. "'Red Flag' Calls Signaled Post-Irma Deaths at Nursing Home" (Associated Press copyrighted story published online in The New York Times on Saturday, September 16, 2017), also accessible at https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/09/16/us/ap-us-hurricane-irma-nursing-home-deaths-.html.

The Associated Press story which has just been hyperlinked above, summarizes the calls to the Florida power company to restore power for the air conditioning in the sweltering heat: "The [nursing home] said the hurricane knocked out a transformer that powered the air conditioning. The center said in a detailed timeline of events released Friday that it repeatedly was told by [the Florida power company] that it would fix the transformer, but the utility did not show up until Wednesday morning, hours after the first patients began having emergencies."

For its part, before it stopped issuing statements or answering questions the Florida power company said that the nursing home "was supposed to have an operational generator."

As noted, the reporting is not complete even now. However, not one report has recorded that the power company ever asked this question to anyone at the nursing home:

Is your generator working?

The power company said in a statement using the passive voice, that "'other critical facilities were identified as higher priorities.'" Tampa Bay Times, supra.

"The utility refused to answer any specific questions about the nursing home case." Associated Press, supra. While the Florida power company conveyed "'our deepest sympathies,'" the power company "did not answer questions regarding the calls the nursing home said were made." Washington Post via Chicago Tribune, supra.

"'At the time this incident occurred, you have to remember when the first patients were dying, there were 150 nursing homes across the state that did not have power.'" Jim Defede, CBS4News, Miami, quoted in Tampa Bay Times, supra.

 

2. Liability Insurance Coverage Questions and the Florida power company.

The questions that follow are not all the questions that can or will be raised concerning the Florida power company's liability insurance coverages. Some of these questions may not apply. Answers, if any, may be forthcoming in newly filed lawsuits. See Tampa Bay Times, supra ("On Friday, a Miami law firm filed a complaint against the Hollywood facility ....); Associated Press, supra (reporting that a family member of a surviving resident "hired an attorney after her 93-year-old mother became severely dehydrated on Wednesday.").

Depending on the type of policy involved, including whether it is a "claims made and reported" policy or an "occurrence-based" policy, the foremost question of liability insurance coverage regarding the power company may involve this one:

"Occurrence": Was there an accident neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the insured, in this instance, neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the Florida power company?

Like unto it, the question arises in the context of Directors and Officers coverage if any: Is there any covered conduct at issue on the part of any of the power company's directors and officers? Or is such coverage excluded by the availability of liability insurance coverage, if any, under other liability insurance policies available to the directors and officers?

Is there potential liability of the Florida power company here only for breach of contract, which is ordinarily excluded under standard liability insurance policies? Or is the power company's potential liability the kind that it would have even if there had been no contract?

Finally, now a very significant question from the outset: the number of occurrences, if any. Was there one or were there 8 or more "occurrences," if any? Was there one occurrence (if any) because for example there was one practice and procedure at the power company which resulted in the damages that might be complained of here? Or were there 8 occurrences (again, if any) because 8 people died? Or if there were any occurrences under the insurance policies at issue, were there more than 8, counting all the people who were injured but who did not die?

Time will tell, and over time the answers to liability insurance coverage questions like these will likely be given by the Florida courts.

Please Read The Disclaimer. ©2017 by Dennis J. Wall. All Rights Reserved.

 

THEY CALLED BUT NO-ONE CAME: LIABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE QUESTIONS.

Eight people died in a nursing home in Hollywood, Florida during Hurricane Irma.  The nursing home's air conditioning went out.  It got hot.  Very hot.

Eight people died from the heat.

A number of people and corporations played a role in this story:  The Florida governor, the Florida power company, and the Florida nursing home.  Their continuing stories will be featured here throughout the coming week, along with their related liability insurance coverage questions.

The stories of the governor, the power company, and the nursing home will not be complete without the starting point of each story:  Eight people died.  What follows is from the reporting so far on what happened.

Moreover, the focus of this article is not on whether there may be good claims of potential liability, but on whether there are claims to potential liability insurance coverage.

1. The Governor: Questions of Liability.

Eight people died in a nursing home in Florida when the air conditioning went out.  The governor gave out his cell phone number to the nursing home operators, among others, to call if they had problems during the Hurricane so that he could help solve them.  The governor's office does not contest that.

They telephoned.  The nursing home called the governor's cell phone three times in fact.  They said that they had called the power company and the power company had not come.  They told the governor's office that they needed the governor's "immediate assistance" to get the power company to help get the air conditioning online again.

No help came.

Not even a return telephone call, they said.

See among the other sources listed in this article:  Aaron Davis, Katie Zezima & Mark Berman, "Officials at Nursing Home Where 8 Died Say They Called Florida Gov. Rick Scott 3 Times For Help" (Washington Post via Chicago Tribune posted on Friday, September 15, 2017), also available at http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-florida-nursing-home-deaths-rick-scott-20170915-story.html.

A spokesperson for the Florida governor said that all calls were returned.

The nursing home says that it called the governor's cell phone three times and no-one came.  See in addition, for example, Chris Perez, "Florida Nursing Home:  Gov. Scott Ignored Our Distress Calls" (New York Post online, posted on Friday, September 15, 2017), also at http://nypost.com/2017/09/15/florida-nursing-home-gov-scott-ignored-our-distress-calls/.

The governor's spokesperson also said that it was not his responsibility; all the calls to his cell number were relayed to the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration or AHCA.

AHCA is the Florida governor.  He appoints them.  They report to him.  They are a part of the government he heads in Florida.

The governor's spokesperson also said that the nursing home should have called 911 if they had a problem.  It was "100% their responsibility" to care for the health of the people in their charge, the governor's office said.  "Report: Before deaths, nursing home called Rick Scott's emergency number three times, to no avail" (Tampa Bay Times staff, posted online on Friday, September 15, 2017), also accessible at http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/report-nursing-home-called-rick-scotts-emergency-number-three-times-to-no/2337665.  After the hurricane, the Florida governor ordered AHCA to issue emergency rules requiring nursing homes, among others, to have working generators. "'Red Flag' Calls Signaled Post-Irma Deaths at Nursing Home" (copyrighted Associated Press Report, published in the New York Times online on Saturday, September 16, 2017), also at https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/09/16/us/ap-us-hurricane-irma-nursing-home-deaths-.html.  

Future installments in this series will, as noted, address liability insurance coverage questions raised by the prospective liability of other participants in the story including the Florida power company and the Florida nursing home.

But this story is about the prospective liability insurance coverage questions surrounding potential coverage, if any, for the Florida governor for the deaths of 8 people from heat in a nursing home during Hurricane Irma.  Whether the nursing home should have called 911, they say that they did call you.  

And no-one came.  You allegedly said to call that special cell number if they needed help. They called.  They did not get help.

 

 

2. Liability Insurance Coverage Questions and the Florida Governor.

The Florida governor may be immune under State law even if he did something wrong in his official capacity.  Assuming that immunity applied here, and as yet there have only been accusations and no allegations or lawsuits, could the liability carrier with coverage in this situation claim the benefit of that immunity to deny all coverage whether the governor claimed immunity or not in the future?

The appropriate method of obtaining compensation from the State is by a claims bill.  If the governor's actions or omissions amount to prospective liability for the State, and if a claims bill is introduced and approved accordingly, would the liability carrier involved in this matter have coverage for the claims bill?  Do you know?

I do not know but I think it is worth finding the answers to these and similar questions.

And the answers, perhaps, to other questions:  Could the plaintiffs (whoever might sue) bring in evidence of the governor's experience with Medicare fraud?  Nursing home residents are almost always Medicare recipients; were the 8 victims?

Finally, did Mr. Scott ever do business with this particular nursing home or its previous corporate iterations in his previous life, so to speak, as the executive of a healthcare corporation?

Please Read The Disclaimer.  ©2017 by Dennis J. Wall.  All Rights Reserved.

HURRICANE IRMA.

Hurricane Irma has interrupted service.  I know that you will understand.  Thank you.

Please Read The Disclaimer.  ©2017 by Dennis J. Wall.  All Rights Reserved.

ROCKY MOUNTAINS FORECASTING HURRICANES IN ATLANTIC. THEY'RE AT IT AGAIN.

The Rocky Mountain Gang is at it again.  See Barry K. Sullivan, "Atlantic Hurricane Outlook Raised by Colorado State Forecasters" (Bloomberg Online, posted July 1, 2016).  Here is the web address of the report:  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-01/atlantic-hurricane-outlook-raised-by-colorado-state-forecasters.

What we colloquially refer to here as "the Rocky Mountain Gang" is the paid group of forecasters assembled at Colorado State University to predict hurricanes in Florida and the other Atlantic and Gulf Coast areas.  George W. Bush and his Administration were the first to think it is a good idea to pay the Rocky Mountain Gang for this service.  With Federal Tax Dollars of course.  So far they are still about the only people who think it is a good idea. 

There are a few flies in the trough, however.  There already is a Federally-funded Hurricane prediction center located in the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, North Carolina, a division of the Federal National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Another fly in the ointment is that while the Colorado State forecasters are at least consistent, they are consistently wrong.  There are too many examples to list here.  Take a look in the "Catastrophe Claims" and "Hurricanes" categories of this blog.

Please Read The Disclaimer.  ©2016 by Dennis J. Wall, Co-Author of "Catastrophe Claims / Insurance Coverage for Natural and Man-Made Disasters" (Thomson Reuters 2016).  (This hyperlink is to the Thomson Reuters Online Store.)  All Rights Reserved.

Related articles

Rocky Mountain Gang Probably Predicts No Hurricanes in Rocky Mountains ...

"INSURANCE CLAIMS AND ISSUES," THE BOOK: COMING IN 2016!

 

 Storm Clouds lined up over the Gulf of Mexico.  Photograph and text copyright 2015-2016 by Dennis J. Wall.

I am hard at work on an anthology of the best blogs from "Insurance Claims and Issues."  The anthology I submit to my publisher will keep all hyperlinks intact, including links to the Insurance Claims and Bad Faith Law blog.  When articles posted on Insurance Claims and Bad Faith Law blog are important to the anthology of "Insurance Claims and Issues," I am including them in the anthology too.

As each previously posted article is updated, the posted articles will remain just as available here as they always have been.  New articles will benefit from me being better informed and better equipped to discuss future insurance claims and issues.

I have contracted with Thomson Reuters (West Publishing Company to those fortunate to have the experience) to publish "Insurance Claims and Issues," the Book, in the late Spring or early Summer of 2016.  Best wishes to everyone for a joyous and Happy New Year!

Please Read The Disclaimer.  ©2016 by Dennis J. Wall, author of "Insurance Claims and Issues" (forthcoming Thomson Reuters 2016).  All rights reserved.

Related articles

Convincing Anyone Yet? Coverage, Contraception, and the Court.

CYBERINSURANCE:  MANY DATA-LESS RISKS TO UNDERWRITE & PREMIUMS TO CHARGE.

THE ALI RESTATEMENT PROJECT OF THE LAW OF LIABILITY INSURANCE.

Majority Holds No Negligence Cause of Action by Insured Against I.A.

MAKING FLORIDA WHOLE.

Sometimes the desire to see perceived equity performed makes judges do unusual things.  In Allstate Ins. Co. v. Theodotou, ___ So. 3d ___, 2015 WL 4486578 (Fla. 5th DCA July 24, 2015)(stated not released for publication in the permanent law reports), notice of certified question filed in Supreme Court of Florida 08.21.15, mandate issued by the Fifth District Court of Appeal on 08.25.15, a panel of one of Florida's intermediate appellate courts dispensed with the requirement of equitable subrogation that the injured party be made whole before there can be any equitable subrogation.

In that case, the majority concentrated on the equities in favor of the party seeking equitable subrogation, an automobile liability carrier which paid its policy limits to the injured claimant who recovered a judgment against the carrier's insured.  The judgment ultimately entered in favor of the injured claimant and against the insured was over $11 Million.  The carrier's policy limits were $1.1 Million.

In Allstate v. Theodotou, the Florida appellate court allowed the auto carrier's equitable subrogation claim against alleged subsequent tortfeasors, namely, medical care providers who allegedly caused or increased the injuries of which the injured claimant complained in his suit against the carrier's insured.  To say again, the injured person had not been made whole; some $10 Million of his injuries remained ascertained but unpaid.

In trying to reach a result which the panel perceived as the result that equity required, it is respectfully submitted that the panel concentrated on the wrong person.  The rule that requires an injured person to be made whole before equitable subrogation will be allowed, focuses on the injured person, not on the party seeking equitable subrogation.  If the auto carrier in this case is to be allowed a cause of action for equitable subrogation, one better alternative might be to require the injured person to be made a party plaintiff in the subrogation suit until her, his or its damages are paid in full, or if the injured person refuses to be joined in the subsequent lawsuit against alleged subsequent tortfeasors, then to document that fact, and in either case only then allow the equitable subrogation action to proceed thereafter.  Parenthetically, in this case, after obtaining judgment against the initial tortfeasor and her auto insurance carrier, the injured person filed his own subsequent lawsuit against alleged subsequent tortfeasors.  Allstate v. Theodotou, ___ So. 3d ___, 2015 WL 4486578, *1 (Fla. 5th DCA July 24, 2015).

The panel in Allstate v. Theodotou, ___ So. 3d ___, 2015 WL 4486578, *5 (Fla. 5th DCA July 24, 2015), wisely and unanimously certified the following question to the Supreme Court of Florida as a question of great public importance:

Is a party that has had judgment entered against it entitled to seek equitable subrogation from a subsequent tortfeasor when the judgment has not been fully satisfied?

Speaking of being made whole, if a major storm visits Florida in the near future -- and the hurricane season never ended before November 30 even before climate change took over -- there is a real question "Would Insurers Survive Storm?"  See Robert Trigaux, "On Business," p. 1D, col. 6 (Tampa Bay Times, "Business" Section, Sunday, May 24, 2015).

 

Please Read The Disclaimer.  ©2015 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

WILL CITIZENS BRIDGE THE FORCE PLACED "GAP"?

"It's probably not addressed as much as it needs to be, but it is a real problem."

Mr. Archie Grant, South Broward (Florida) Board of Realtors, quoted by Dan Sweeney, Sun Sentinel (Ft. Lauderdale), December 16, 2014.

    Mr. Grant was testifying before Florida State Representatives from Broward County, Florida (Ft. Lauderdale) who are members of an insurance subcommittee in the Florida House of Representatives.  He told them about people whose homeowner's insurance policies supposedly lapsed and whose lenders force-placed insurance on them with much higher premiums.   In some cases, Mr. Grant observed, the lenders controlled the force-placing insurance carriers.

    A member of the Broward delegation to the Florida House (and a very scarce commodity in Broward County, a Democrat), reportedly suggested that perhaps Citizens Property Insurance Corporation "'can help bridge that gap until that person can get back into the private marketplace'."  Id.

    The lawmakers are planning to meet with Citizens' representatives this month to discuss their ideas about the increasing costs of wind and flood insurance for Florida residents.

The author is at work on a book on "Lender Force-Placed Insurance" which the American Bar Association has scheduled for publication this Spring. 

The author wishes to thank Mr. Dan Luby of Orlando for alerting me to this story.  Mr. Luby is an avid reader of this insurance blog and his input is always gratefully appreciated.

Copyright 2015 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

ADJUSTING SANDY SANCTIONS IN NEW YORK.

    A United States District Judge has affirmed a Magistrate Judge's imposition of sanctions for conduct in the course of adjusting and litigating Sandy claims.  The Magistrate Judge's decision was commented on here.  "Federal Court in New York Investigates Sandy Adjusting," November 12, 2014.

    The District Judge laid out the entire situation concisely at the beginning of a longer opinion.  The Judge's opening is well worth reading in full:

Pending before the Court is defendant's appeal of an order issued by Magistrate Judge Gary R. Brown on November 7, 2014, In re Hurricane Sandy Cases, ___ F.R.D. ___, 2014 WL 5801540 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 7, 2014)(the “November 7 Order”), addressing the disclosure of draft engineering reports on insured properties allegedly affected by Hurricane Sandy, and imposing evidentiary sanctions on defendant Wright and monetary sanctions on its counsel for failing to obey discovery orders and causing undue delay to these proceedings. The sanctions arose from (1) a failure by defendant and its counsel to disclose an initial written report (dated December 9, 2012) by George Hernemar, an engineer from U.S. Forensic (“USF”), who had inspected the home at issue and concluded that it had been damaged beyond repair by Hurricane Sandy, and (2) the conduct by defendant's counsel at a subsequent evidentiary hearing before Magistrate Judge Brown to determine how the undisclosed initial report was modified into a second subsequent report, dated January 7, 2013 (disclosed to plaintiffs), which eliminated certain observations by the engineer and reached the exact opposite conclusions—namely, that the defects in the home had not been caused by the storm, but rather were due to long-term deterioration. In particular, following the evidentiary hearing, Magistrate Judge Brown found, inter alia, the following: (1) defendant and its counsel violated their obligations to comply with this Court's discovery orders by failing to produce the initial engineering report; (2) the process, in this particular case, that led to the alterations of Hernemar's observations in the initial report and the reversal of the report's conclusions was “flawed,” “unprincipled,” “reprehensible,” and “highly improper”; (3) the failure to disclose the initial report resulted, in this case, in “unreasonably prolonging this litigation, imposing unnecessary costs upon plaintiffs and further contributing to the unwarranted delays in resolving this claim”; and (4) “given the discovery failures by defendant's counsel, the unreasonable response by defendant to the allegations, and counsel's shocking attempt to curtail inquiry during the hearing, it is reasonable to charge the costs associated with the hearing to defendant's counsel.” (November 7 Order, at 13, 15–25.)

For the reasons set forth in detail below, the Court affirms Magistrate Judge Brown's November 7 Order in its entirety. More specifically, there is no basis for this Court to conclude that Magistrate Judge Brown's findings or his sanctions were clearly erroneous or contrary to law, as would be required for a reversal. Having carefully reviewed the record, it is absolutely clear to this Court that the process that led to the modification of the initial engineering report (including the removal of observations that were inconsistent with the new conclusions) was flawed, and the concealment of that initial report and the process that led to the new report (including conduct at the evidentiary hearing) has prejudiced plaintiffs in terms of delay and costs in this litigation, such that the sanctions were warranted.

 

In re Hurricane Sandy Cases (Raimey v. Wright Nat'l Flood Ins. Co.), ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, 2014 WL 7399179, *1 (E.D.N.Y. December 31, 2014)(Bianco, United States District Judge).  [Emphasis added.]

 

Please Read The Disclaimer.  Copyright 2015 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.  No claim to Original U.S. Government Works.

Related articles

THEY WERE AGAINST IT BEFORE THEY WERE FOR IT: Fladell, THE FIRST PART.

THEY WERE AGAINST IT BEFORE THEY WERE FOR IT: Fladell, THE THIRD PART.

FEDERAL COURT IN NEW YORK INVESTIGATES SANDY ADJUSTING.

    Mr. George Hernemar is a licensed engineer.  His employer, an engineering firm, sent Mr. Hernemar to inspect approximately 50 homes for damage Sandy may have caused to them in 2012.

    The engineering firm that Mr. Hernemar worked for was retained by the policyholders' insurance company to investigate their claim of damage.  The policyholders owned a rental house adjacent to their own home.  Upon inspection of the rental house, Mr. Herneman affirmatively wrote that he observed among other things that Sandy structurally damaged the building.

    "However, plaintiffs never received this report from their insurance carrier."  Instead, the policyholders received a report written afterward, which contained the conclusion that, among other things, "the subject building was not structurally damaged".  In re Hurricane Sandy Cases (Raimey v. Wright National Flood Insurance Co.), 2014 WL 5801540 *3 (E.D.N.Y. November 7, 2014)(Brown, U.S.M.J.).  [Emphasis by the Court.] 

    Although Mr. Hernemar took responsibility for both reports and contended that the first one was only a draft and not a real report, the Court noted Mr. Hernemar's testimony that the "'rewrote my report'" and that the second report did not exist until after Mr. Hernemar had a telephone conversation with a representative of his employer.

    The first Hernemar report surfaced in the case only by "happenstance," the Court said.  It was apparently not produced in discovery.  The second Hernemar report was produced in discovery and, as noted, the policyholders received the second Hernemar report, but not the first one.

      "Based upon this [second] report, defendant refused to pay for any structural damage to the home."  In re Hurricane Sandy Cases (Raimey v. Wright National Flood Insurance Co.), 2014 WL 5801540 *3 (E.D.N.Y. November 7, 2014)(Brown, U.S.M.J.).

    Under all the evidence before it in this case, the Court concluded that adjustment of Sandy claims is apparently ripe for investigation:

   Against this backdrop arises the instant dispute, which has exposed reprehensible gamesmanship by a professional engineering company that unjustly frustrated efforts by two homeowners to get fair consideration of their claims. Worse yet, evidence suggests that these unprincipled practices may be widespread.

 In re Hurricane Sandy Cases (Raimey v. Wright National Flood Insurance Co.), 2014 WL 5801540 *1 (E.D.N.Y. November 7, 2014)(Brown, U.S.M.J.).

    In addition to adjusting practices in all of the consolidated Sandy-claim-cases, the Court considered the case before it, concluding that in the case at bar (1) the defendant insurance company "is prohibited from supporting its defenses or opposing plaintiffs' claims with any expert testimony other than that of George Hernemar," and (2) the plaintiffs' counsel may file a motion "for reimbursement from defendant's counsel for all reasonable costs associated with this motion, the hearing and all related briefing, including attorneys' fees, travel costs and transcription costs".

    With respect to this case and all of the other pending consolidated Sandy cases, the Court further ruled: 

3. Within thirty days of this Order, defendants in all Hurricane Sandy cases shall provide plaintiffs with copies of all reports described in CMO 1 not previously produced—plus any drafts, redlines, markups, reports, notes, measurements, photographs and written communications related thereto—prepared, collected or taken by any engineer, adjustor or other agent or contractor affiliated with any defendant, relating to the properties and damage at issue in each and every case, whether such documents are in the possession of defendant or any third party.

In re Hurricane Sandy Cases (Raimey v. Wright National Flood Insurance Co.), 2014 WL 5801540 *15 (E.D.N.Y. November 7, 2014)(Brown, U.S.M.J.).

    Clearly, the Court in this case was not pleased.  Yet no-one who reads this opinion and considers this ruling on the evidence can reasonably second-guess the decision.  The ruling, like the unpleasant taste left by the apparent conduct at issue here, was a result of the evidence in the record.

Please Read The Disclaimer.  Copyright 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.  No claim to Original U.S. Government Works.

HURRICANE HUNTING ... WITH DRONES AND OTHER AIRCRAFT WITHOUT PILOTS.

    A huge leap has recently been taken in Hurricane hunting.  You are probably very familiar with the "Hurricane Hunters," aircraft crews which fly into and out of Hurricanes at continuing risks to their lives, in order to tell us about how our lives are likely to be affected by the storms.

    A little-reported story, however, is that NASA has budgeted funds for several years of successful tests involving remotely piloted aircraft which do much the same thing.  But at a much lower risk to human life.

    The NASA project involves the use of drones powered by jet engines to fly over Hurricanes, drop sensors, and analyze the results.  Already, the project is a success.   See Scott Dance, "Mission to Analyze Hurricanes From Above Coming to Quiet End / NASA Goddard Scientists Use Unmanned Aircraft to Learn Why Tropical Storms Form and Fade" (Baltimore Sun Online September 26, 2014).  (The title of this linked article refers to this year's project coming to an end because the Hurricane season is also coming to an end this year.  It does not refer to funds being removed from the NASA budget for this project.)

    The positive effects on insurance coverage availability for Hurricanes and Catastrophes are enormous.

    If the project is allowed to succeed.

Please Read The Disclaimer.  Copyright 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.   All rights reserved.  No claim to original U.S. Government Works or Baltimore Sun copyrighted material.

 

LABOR DAY, CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE, SAME MESSAGE: HOME IT.

   On this Labor Day, we are all mindful of the earthquake that just struck California.  In the past, we have been mindful of the Hurricanes that strike the Southeast.  As we work to provide for our families, repair the damage, and build a better home for ourselves and our neighbors, let's take the time in the very near future to do our annual review of our homeowner's coverage.  See Ann Carrns, "After Napa Jolt, Quake-Proofing Your Homeowner's Insurance" p. B5, col. 1 (New York Times Nat'l ed., "Personal Business," Saturday, August 30, 2014).

   Remember Labor on this Day!

Please Read The Disclaimer.  Copyright 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

Related articles

Hurricane Sandy Damage Claims: Whether Homeowners Hurricane Deductibles Apply.

Federal INSURANCE Laws to Preempt STATE Insurance Laws.

Your Money Adviser: After Napa Jolt, Quake-Proofing Your Homeowner's Insurance

3.4-magnitude quake hits near Napa

Strongest quake in 25 years strikes Bay Area

P.S. NOAA's CLIMATE PREDICTION CENTER.

This is a postscript to "Rocky Mountain Gang Probably Predicts No Hurricanes ...." which was posted here on August 12, 2014.

   Terms and Conditions, the III.Insurance Blog, posted an article on August 8, 2014 with this title:  "Why a Below-Normal Hurricane Forecast Doesn't Matter".  The III's article cited to NOAA's Climate Prediction Center as its source for Hurricane predictions.

   You could substitute the title, "Why a Rocky Mountain Hurricane Forecast Doesn't Matter" for the title of the article posted here on August 12, 2014, and you would get the gist.

   Consider the sources.  When the subject is Hurricanes, results matter.

Please Read The Disclaimer.  Copyright 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved. 

Related articles

Postscript to Not-a-Hurricane Sandy and Your Hurricane Deductible.

More Hurricane Sandy Deductibles, This Time Wind?

Fewer hurricanes predicted in updated forecast

Fewer hurricanes now expected this year, forecasters say

ROCKY MOUNTAIN GANG PROBABLY PREDICTS NO HURRICANES IN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ...

...Not so many in other areas of the country where Hurricanes have actually been seen in the past.

   I saved this one up since Hurricane Season began.  Once again, Colorado State forecasters, operating under a no-bid contract awarded by the last Bush to predict Hurricanes in the Southeast, says that there will be fewer Hurricanes in the Southeast this Season.  We are halfway home, and their prediction is holding true since they first made their prediction in April.  USA Today reported on this news event in April at http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/04/10/colorado-state-hurricane-forecast/7544005/.  (If you see this hyperlink here, it will only be because I tested it out first and it worked for me when I tested it.)

   Once again, as we have witnessed in the past, NOAA already pays for Hurricane forecasts at locations actually in the Southeast.  And, the Rocky Mountain Gang has been consistently wrong.  Which is what you would expect under the circumstances.

   Anyway, if Hurricanes do develop, you can expect to read here about all the Insurance Coverage issues they spawn.  That is my forecast!

Please Read The Disclaimer.  Copyright 2014 by Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

Related articles

Computer Claim Models Used to Increase Auto Insurance Premiums ...

Hurricane Sandy Damage Claims: Whether Homeowners Hurricane Deductibles Apply.

SANDY AND THE A.L.E.

          Sandy repairs are reportedly taking so long in the New York City area, that Additional Living Expense is coming into play.  In insurance parlance, this is "A.L.E." Coverage, and not everyone has it.

          Those that do not have A.L.E. insurance coverage may have to apply to private resources including charities for assistance after all this time,  since reportedly New York City and other government repair and rebuild programs are into their second summer of not accomplishing much since Sandy struck 20 months ago.  See Liz Robbins, "After the Storm, 20 Months in Limbo," p. 26, col. 1 (New York Times Nat'l ed., Sunday, June 22, 2014).

 © 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.  No claim to original U.S. Government works.

 Please Read The Disclaimer.

Related articles

Hurricane Sandy Damage Claims: Whether Homeowners Hurricane Deductibles Apply.

RUSSIANS DRILLING FOR OIL IN THE U.S. GULF OF MEXICO ...

... PURCHASING RIGHTS IN DEAL WITH EXXON:  THE INSURANCE IMPLICATIONS.

           Exxon has sold oil rights to Russia in the Gulf of Mexico.  Russia is using its oil rights to drill for oil in the Deepwater Horizon territory.  See Christopher Helman, "Will Exxon's 'Bromance' With the Kremlin Help Keep Putin in Check?" (www.forbes.com, posted online March 20, 2014).

          We will let others address questions concerning sanctions for conduct in the Crimea, and whether the Russians have immunity from suit even when yet another oil catastrophe occurs, should damage result to people and businesses in the United States from Russian oil drilling operations in the Gulf of Mexico.

          Will there be insurance for those damages should they occur?  Will there be any of the kinds of coverages discussed here and elsewhere after the last oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico including:

• Business Interruption?
• Contingent Business Interruption?
• "Extra Expense"?
• Bodily Injury and Property Damage?

See generally Dennis J. Wall, "Claims Handling Practices Issues:  Releases of Claims:  Macondo--Deepwater Horizon and the BP Business Model," § 2:15 in John K. DiMugno, Steven Plitt and Dennis J. Wall, Catastrophe Claims:  Insurance Coverage For Natural and Man-Made Disasters" (West Publishing Co. 2014 Supplements in Process).

          And they said the Deepwater Horizon escapade was over with.

© 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.  No claim to original U.S. Government works.

 Please Read The Disclaimer.

"MISSING" SANDY MONEY, NEW JERSEY? WHAT DOES CHRIS CHRISTIE KNOW?

         In a public appearance just last month that was recorded on video and linked on Insurance Claims and Bad Faith Law Blog, Gov. Christie of New Jersey said that homeowners' insurance claims were getting paid much more than in New York.  Much, much more.  If I recall correctly, he even said the insurance payments in New Jersey were "exponentially" more.  But you can check out what he said for yourself in the linked video which recorded his public performance.

          It turns out the truth is more like, "Not so much."

          New Jersey policyholders pursuing Flood insurance claims after Sandy have averaged $47,264.00 in a total payout of $3.5 Billion.

          New York policyholders pursuing Flood insurance claims as a result of Sandy have averaged $64,912.00 in a total payout of $3.7 Billion.

          Policyholders who pursued Flood insurance claims after Katrina, in contrast, were paid an average of $97,053.00 in a total payout of $16.3 Billion.  These figures come from a Federal Emergency Management Agency report accessible at www.fema.gov, reported by the USA Today newspaper in a story by Michael L. Diamond and Jean Mikle published online on St. Patrick's Day Eve, available at www.usatoday.com.

          Why did New Jersey policyholders average less in claims payments than New York policyholders' claims resulting from the same storm?  And why did New Jersey policyholders after Sandy get their claims paid at less than half the average rate that Flood insurance claims were paid after Katrina?

          Because Sandy hit New York differently than it hit New Jersey and caused greater damage in a greater storm surge.

          And because Katrina hit the GulfCoast with massively greater damage than Sandy hit New Jersey, or anywhere else.  Katrina damaged expensive commercial property, for example, whereas Sandy did not.  "Not so much."

          That's actually the truth.  Whether it's on video, or not.  Whether you say it loudly or softly, it doesn't change.  It's still the truth.

© 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.  No claim to original U.S. Government works.

Please Read The Disclaimer.

 

SANDY MONEY IN NEW JERSEY.

          There were a lot of news reports published on January 13th of this year about the uses to which Federal Sandy relief money is being put in New Jersey.  Federal investigations topped the headlines then.  In the weeks since, the seemingly never-ending parallel story surrounding the lane closures in September on the George Washington Bridge has mostly driven the story of Sandy money out of the public view.

          Things have been developing in the story of Sandy money use in New Jersey, even when most people are looking at other things.  For some reason, the governor's administration in New Jersey chose the next-to-last Wednesday in January, or January 22 to be precise, that they had terminated a Sandy relief contract in December.

          The Sandy contract was with a TPA or third-party administrator apparently to coordinate Sandy relief, or at least to manage the disbursement of Federal relief funds to Sandy victims in New Jersey.   The New Jersey administration awarded the contract to a politically connected company, Hammerman & Gainer, with 7 locations:  4 in Louisiana, 2 in Texas, 1 in Washington, D.C., and None in New Jersey.  At first glance, you might notice as I did that the two States where this company does have  locations have Republican governors, like New Jersey does.  The D.C. location has its own implications.

          However, the company displays its qualifications on its website and it lists some experience following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita as a catastrophic risk manager "managing" claims and inspections.  Further, it says that it "disbursed over $7 billion".  Here is a link to the company's website so that you can see for yourself:   Hammerman & Gainer website self-description.

          The company's Sandy relief contract in New Jersey was reportedly to oversee the distribution of Sandy relief funds of $600 Million.  The contract was reportedly for 3 years when New Jersey signed it, at a cost of $68 Million or some 11% of the Sandy relief money apparently available to New Jersey from Federal Taxpayers.  Bloomberg News, "Pols Call For Probe as Christie Ends Contracts," posted on Crain's New York Business on January 30, 2014.

          As you can see for yourself, this report was published on January 30th.  Nothing else has been reported since January 13th on the issue of how Sandy relief funds are being used in New Jersey.

          Time for some Sandy relief questions.

          Why did the New Jersey administration enter into this contract with this company in the first place?  Was the contract bid, or was it one of those infamous no-bid contracts which are awarded to favored parties?

          Why did the New Jersey administration choose the last Wednesday in January, 2014 to announce that a month before, it had terminated the contract?

          Is there a new contract that took the place of this contract?

          Who if anyone has been overseeing the distribution of Sandy relief funds from the Federal Taxpayers ever since this company's risk management/TPA contract to perform those services was terminated?

          Where is the Sandy relief money?

 © 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.  No claim to original U.S. Government works.

 Please Read The Disclaimer.

Computer Models, Catastrophe Predictions, Premiums, and Claims.

    Continuing the trend toward Federal involvement in Insurance issues, the Government Accountability Office ("GAO") was asked by several U.S. Senate and U.S. House Members to prepare a report on what would be involved for private insurance companies to take on the additional risks of Flood Insurance.  (Private insurance companies avoid Flood risks; actually, private insurance companies refuse to cover them.  That is why the National Flood Insurance Program was enacted.)

    The GAO reported back that private insurance companies still do not want to wade into Floods, so to speak.  In general, if private insurance companies were going to take on risks in addition to those which they already cover, then private insurance companies would of course have to evaluate those risks, the GAO reported.  Here is the GAO report:  "Flood Insurance / Strategies for Increasing Private Sector Involvement" (released under date of January, 2014).

   At the same time as the GAO released the report, private insurance companies announced that they are establishing their own computer modeling platforms for evaluating catastrophic risks including Hurricanes and other 'weather events' which cause catastrophic damage including from floods.  Charles E. Boyle, "21 Insurers, Brokers Launch Oasis 'Open Source' Cat Model," posted online in "Carrier Managment", January 29, 2014.  Parenthetically, "Carrier Management" is a relatively new newsletter which apparently belongs to the same publishing group as the more widely known "Insurance Journal" and "Claims Journal" publications. 

© 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.  No claim to original U.S. Government works.

Please Read The Disclaimer.

HOW LONG CAN WE AFFORD THIS?

   "High tides have been getting higher and low tides lower at cities around the Gulf of Mexico, according to a new study produced in part by scientists at the University of South Florida."  Craig Pittman, "Study:  Higher Tides From Climate Change Likely to Make Hurricane Flooding Worse" (Tampa Bay Times Online, Wednesday, January 22, 2014).

   The article you are reading is not about climate change.  That is covered by the article in the newspaper linked above. 

   Instead this article covers the payment of studies about climate change.  The University of South Florida's study of higher and lower tides at Gulf Coast cities is featured in the above article.  The University of South Florida is located in Tampa.  Tampa is a city on the Gulf Coast.  It stands to reason that researchers at the University of South Florida are capable of providing measurements and results from tests on Gulf Coast tides, that researchers located elsewhere cannot match as easily, if at all, simply by USF's location at the Gulf Coast.

   Hurricanes are still being examined at Colorado State University in the Rocky Mountains, however.  The CSU researchers are operating with Federal Taxpayer dollars first awarded in the George W. Bush administration.  (Whether Federal Taxpayer dollars were awarded to CSU before or after Hurricane Katrina is not presently known.)  The Rocky Mountain Gang has predicted the number of hurricanes and named storms every year since, and most every since, they have been wrong.  Further, the United States Taxpayers already pay for a National Hurricane Center located in Florida.  And the National Climatic Data Center located in North Carolina.  These facts have previously been reported under the categories of "Hurricanes" and "Catastrophe Claims," and most recently in this article posted on January 19, 2014 on Insurance Claims and Bad Faith Law Blog.

   How long can we afford to funnel Federal Taxpayer dollars to pay for failed results?  At a time when officials argue that unemployed people should take low-paying jobs which provide no benefits so that favored entrepeneurs can sell products, how long can we afford to use Federal Taxpayer money for these results?  How long can we afford it?

Please Read The Disclaimer.

 © 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.  No claim to original U.S. Government works.

 

Related articles

USF: Sharp swings detected in Gulf tides

Tracking Climate Change: Md. Residents Snap Pictures Of High Tides

 

MORE FROM THE 15th ANNUAL WINDSTORM INSURANCE CONFERENCE 2014 IN ORLANDO.

          The first breakout session I attended today was "Use of Experts in Windstorm Cases."  On so many levels, this excellent course could have been entitled simply, "Use of Experts."  The key is preparation, preparation, preparation.

          Attorneys welcome the consultation of Experts whether the attorneys represent Policyholders or Insurance Companies.  The Experts educate the lawyers who educate their clients.  Again, the key is preparation.

          The same key unlocks the second breakout session I attended today, "Be a Better Witness:  Rules for Navigating Deposition Preparation and Testimony."

          In the case of Videotaped Depositions, the title of this session could easily have worked without the word, "deposition".  This informative session was all about Preparation and Testimony for Trial as well.

          All three of the presenters agreed that a video deposition is just the same as testifying at Trial in the sense that all sides will or may play parts of the video testimony to the Jury.  Preparation is the key to success in video testimony, as preparation is the key to success in so many other things in life.  The witness in a video deposition needs to be prepared to speak to the Jury in her own mind when she testifies in the deposition.  She needs to make eye contact, in this case with the camera.  This obviously can lead to the witness feeling the pressure of testifying.  The best way for the witness to remain calm is preparation.

          If the witness in a video deposition takes a long time to answer what seems to be a simple question, for example, there are consequences that do not exist in other types of depositions.  The video deposition "long pause" will be shown to the Jury, for example, whereas there is nothing similar in the deposition transcript even if the Court Reporter makes a note like, "(Pause by the witness before answering)," or some other notation to that same effect.

          In either case, whether the testimony is recorded in a video or in a transcript, a "long pause" before the witness answers indicates that the witness needed more preparation than she received before she went into the deposition room to testify.

          Simply put, if the case is worth litigating, it is worth preparing.  If the testimony is important enough to videotape, it is important enough to review.  That observation applies in the long run as well as in the short run, in my judgment.  Either way we think of it, the answer comes out the same on this one:  Evaluate yourself and improve.

 © 2014 by Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.  No claim to original U.S. Government works.

 Please Read The Disclaimer.

Climate Change: The Insurance Companies Know. Don't You?

   The United Nations is in the midst of one of the many controversies swirling around climate change.  See Justin Gillis, "By Degrees / A Climate Alarm, Too Muted for Some" p. D1, col. 1 (New York Times Nat'l ed., "ScienceTimes," Tuesday, September 10, 2013).

   To property and casualty insurance companies and their reinsurers, there are no controversies.  There are only increasing risks and rising payouts as a result of climate change.  See, in particular, the Category "Climate Risk" on this blog.

Please Read The Disclaimer.

Related articles

Policyholder Attorney's Fees Award in a Florida "Confirmed Sinkhole Case".