Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company v. Mathis —So.3d—, 35 Fla. L. Weekly D868a, 2010 WL 1542631 (Fla. 1st DCA April 20, 2010)
Mr. and Mrs. Mathis suffered damage to their two story home in Navarre Beach following Hurricane Ivan. The Mathis’ were insured under a flood policy and a separate homeowners policy which covered windstorm coverage. The home was deemed a total loss by the county and in order to rebuild or repair, the Mathis’ would need to comply with current building codes requirements with regards to elevation heights. The expense to repair as well as the unsafe nature of the structure left the Mathis’ with no choice but to demolish their home.
The Flood insurer paid the full policy limits of $295,000. The wind insurer, Florida Farm Bureau, argued that it did not have to pay the full value of its policy limits since the flood insurer paid on the claim. Further, Florida Farm Bureau’s position was that the total loss of the house was attributed more to flood than wind to wind. A trial court rejected this argument and found the home to be a total constructive loss. Pursuant to Florida’s Valued Policy Law, the Mathis’ were awarded the full amount of their windstorm benefits.
On appeal, Florida Farm Bureau argued that the trial court allowed the Mathis’ to recover twice for the same claim and should have “set off” the amount paid by the Flood carrier to reduce the amount owed for wind damage. The Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s decision and found that an insurance company cannot reduce wind insurance payments simply because flood payments were paid on the same claim.
To read the decision:
http://opinions.1dca.org/written/opinions2010/04-20-2010/09-1707.pdf
Tags: florida insurance law, homeowner's insurance, hurricane claims, insurance claims, insurance coverage law, valued policy law
