Up now to the Supreme Court
The Florida Supreme Court is being asked to decide the question of whether it’s appropriate for a public adjuster to also serve as a disinterested appraiser in a property damage claims dispute. And of particular interest, this case involves contingency fees from the appraisal process.
Charles and Diana Sanders of Miami-Dade County sued their insurance company, State Farm Florida, in a dispute over the amount of loss from damages following 2017’s Hurricane Irma. The Sanders hired a public adjuster on contingency to help them, then invoked the appraisal process, using the same adjuster as their appraiser.
The Third District Court of Appeal (DCA) recently denied State Farm’s request to quash the Miami-Dade Circuit Court order that allowed the Sanders to do so. But the DCA noted a conflict within its own past rulings, including one from last year that declared such a contingency relationship meant the adjuster could not serve as a disinterested appraiser.
So the DCA has now sent a direct question to the Florida Supreme Court as “a matter of great importance.” It is, “Can a fiduciary, such as a public adjuster or appraiser who is in a contractual agent-principal relationship with the insureds and who receives a contingency fee from the appraisal award, be a disinterested appraiser as a matter of law?”
Our January 6 newsletter warned of this trend and a December 2019 4th DCA decision against another adjuster/appraiser, ruling that when it comes to contingency fees, the adjuster cannot be deemed “disinterested” in their subsequent role as appraiser on the same claim. The 3rd DCA covers Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties and the 4th DCA covers neighboring Broward County north to Indian River County. So we now have two disparate rulings just a county-line apart.
Indeed, what may need to be decided here ultimately is the definition of “disinterested” apart from the use of contingency fees.
LMA Newsletter of 4-27-20
