Fla. CFO Seeks to Clarify Reported Confusion with Storm Claims, Outlines Options to Help Consumers

March 30, 2005

  • March 31, 2005 at 8:11 am
    R. Howell says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    So the fact that the insurance contract has a replacement cost valuation clause that clearly explains the process, deadlines, etc, that was agreed to by the purchaser (insured) makes no difference? We should now expect an insurance carrier (the other party to the contract) to disregard this part of the contract but comply with the parts that someone “thinks they should” comply with? Why not just throw out the whole contract or check out of Florida?

  • March 31, 2005 at 3:37 am
    JR Contractor says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    no price gouging going on here. I’m more than happy to give “estimates”.

  • March 31, 2005 at 5:24 am
    Michael says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Insurers have not done a well job adjusting claims in Florida. Adjustors have been pushed by their companies to hurry and close files often writting unrealistically too low settlements and not explaining the poilcy and how a claim works for thier insureds. The letters sent leave policy holders confused and dazed. Sure the hurricanes went through florida and my home was damaged too, but in the end did insurers do all that they could??

  • March 31, 2005 at 5:29 am
    cliff mckelvy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    WAY TO GO! We need more like you. Insurance companies HOLD valuable monies for insureds that need payments for unexpected damages and must be allowed to rebuild their properties, their lives, recover from the unexpected and have their FREEDOM restored.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*