Loss Notice Dispute Blocks Repairs
|
Homeowners |
Loss Notice |
|
Breach of Contract |
|
Walter and Yasmin
Gonzales’ home was insured under a homeowners policy issued by People’s Trust
Insurance Company (People’s). The policy contained a Preferred Contractor
Endorsement. In exchange for a reduced premium and in lieu of paying cash to
the insured, the form allowed People’s to send its own contractors to assess
and repair the insured property.
On September 10,
2017, the Gonzalez property sustained damage from Hurricane Irma when a tree
fell on the house. Walter Gonzalez reported the loss to People’s on September
13, 2017, and on September 15 it sent its preferred contractor, Rapid Response
Team, LLC, to perform emergency mitigation prior to sending out a claims
adjuster to estimate the cost of repairing the damage.
People's sent its
claims adjuster to perform an inspection on November 10, 2017. On December 10,
2017, People's sent a letter to the Gonzalezes notifying them that it had
completed its investigation and determined that the loss was covered. The
letter explained that, pursuant to the Preferred Contractor Endorsement, People's
would use its preferred contractor, Rapid Response, to restore the property to
its pre-loss condition. The letter further advised the Gonzalezes that People's
had not yet completed its own estimate of the loss by stating, “[o]nce we
finalize our inspection with our field adjuster, a list of what we believe
needs to be repaired will be provided to you.” In that letter, the insurer also
requested that the Gonzalezes provide an executed sworn proof of loss within 60
days.
On January 24,
2018, Walter Gonzalez provided the signed sworn proof of loss and executed a
work authorization to People's, modifying the forms People's Trust provided him
by deleting the “agreement as to scope of repairs” clause. His wording replaced
the provision, stating instead that Rapid Response must—with time being of the
essence—commence repairs to “put the Insured back to their pre-loss
condition.” Gonzalez testified that because he had not received an estimate
from People's, he indicated on the proof of loss form that the “Whole Loss and
Damage” and the “Amount Claimed” were “pending.” People's accepted Gonzalez's
work authorization form. However, it rejected his proof of loss form as
deficient. People’s notified the Gonzalezes that their contractor could not
begin repairs without knowing what was damaged along with an estimate of repairs.
Further, the
appraisal provision in the Preferred Contractor Endorsement stated that “[i]f
[the Gonzalezes] and [People's Trust] fail to agree on the amount of loss,
which includes the scope of repairs, either may demand an appraisal as to the
amount of loss and the scope of repairs.” Under the appraisal provision, once
the appraisers set the amount of loss and the scope of repairs, “[t]he scope of
repairs shall establish the work to be performed and completed by Rapid
Response Team, LLC.”
People's notified
Gonzalez that until he agreed to a what specifically needed to be repaired and
provided the specific dollar estimate of the repairs, People's contractor could
not begin repairs.
In March 2018,
the Gonzalezes filed a complaint against People's. Their request for
declaratory judgment included one count for breach of the Preferred Contractor
repair contract, and one count for breach of the policy for failing to begin
the covered repairs. The Gonzalezes’ complaint and subsequent amended complaint
sought a declaratory judgment determining that People's Trust “must begin the
repair process immediately.”
In response,
People's filed a counterclaim with one count for declaratory relief and one
count in the alternative for material breach of the policy and the
Preferred Contractor repair contract, alleging that the Gonzalezes’ failure to
substantially comply with their post-loss obligations relieved People's Trust
of any further coverage obligation related to the claim. People's Trust
subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the Gonzalezes
failed to substantially comply with People's Trust's request for a
policy-compliant sworn proof of loss and failed to acknowledge that People's Trust's
estimated scope of repair was sufficient in scope for the purpose of restoring
the insured dwelling to its pre-loss condition.
The trial court
entered final summary judgment in favor of People's Trust. The Gonzalezes
appealed.
On appeal, the
court noted that no dispute existed that the Gonzalezes’ property incurred
damage from Hurricane Irma and no dispute existed that People’s Trust conceded
coverage for those as yet unspecified losses under the policy. The policy
indicated that the Gonzalezes must continue to comply with their post-loss
obligations even after People's Trust invoked its right to repair their
property.
On this record,
the court stated, whether the Gonzalezes substantially complied with their
post-loss obligations once People's Trust acknowledged coverage, or whether
they totally failed to comply, was a disputed issue of fact and therefore
summary judgment was improvidently granted.
According to the
court, it remained to be determined whether the Gonzalezes’ submitted sworn
proof of loss constituted a breach of the policy to the extent of justifying
forfeiture of coverage when People’s Trust had conceded coverage. Until the
policy's post-loss obligations were met, there could be no disagreement as to
the amount of the loss.
The trial court’s
grant of summary judgment in favor of People’s Trust was reversed, and the case
was remanded for further proceedings.
Gonzalez v.
People’s Trust Insurance Company—District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third
District—October 21, 2020—No. 3D19-646.