Advertising Disclosure Email Disclosure

You only get one bite at the “appraisal” apple.

July 1, 2017
Noa v. Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3787, *4 (Fla. 3d DCA Mar. 22, 2017)

The Third District Court of Appeals recently affirmed a trial court’s denial of a homeowner’s motion to compel a second appraisal of his windstorm claim. The appellate court agreed that an insured was not entitled to have the appraisal panel reconvene to consider his claim for additional proceeds under the law and the ordinance provisions of the policy. In Noa, the carrier and the homeowners agreed to appraise the scope of the loss, namely the extent of damage to the home’s roof. After the appraisal award was entered and paid by the carrier, the homeowner submitted a request for additional funds, which he contended were required due to code requirements. Suit was filed, and the homeowner sought to have a second appraisal for the additional law and ordinance damages. The court explained, “In order to perform competently as an appraiser for this purpose, and to be designated by a party or by other appraisers or the court (as an umpire), logic and common sense require that an appraiser must have experience in the estimation of materials and labor costs for the repair and replacement of damaged property. In the case of roof work, appraisers must consider the requirements of the applicable building codes in order to estimate the cost of repair or replacement. This is an area for professional construction industry expertise and should be ‘baked into’ the appraiser’s and umpire’s computations, and not left open for a re-appraisal or for a determination by the court.” If you are participating in the appraisal process, the award should make it clear that it is addressing any and all aspects of the claim or specifically identify any parts of the claim the participants are leaving open to be determined at a later date. Otherwise, an insured is not entitled to re-open an appraisal or demand a second appraisal.

 

Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2017

Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2017 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.

Affiliated Attorney

Michael A. Packer
Co-Chair, Insurance Coverage/ Bad Faith Litigation Practice Group
(954) 847-4921
mapacker@mdwcg.com

Practice Areas

Before you send this email please note:

You are attempting to send email, through a link on our website, to an attorney of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin or an employee in our firm. Please note that your email may not be treated as confidential and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should not rely upon the transmission of an email through this website if you are seeking to enter into such a relationship. Until such time as we have agreed to represent you, no information in your email will be treated as confidential. Please contact us directly by telephone at 1.800.220.3308 if it is your intent to seek legal counsel with our firm or convey confidential information.

If it is still your intent to send this email, knowing that it may not be treated as confidential, you may accept our terms of agreement by pressing "OK". If you choose not to accept these terms of agreement you may navigate away from this page by pressing "Cancel."