The Nationwide Flood Insurance coverage Program is fraught with difficulties relating to the gathering of quantities when there’s a disagreement. One necessary lesson is {that a} partial denial, even an innocuous one made earlier than a proper proof of loss, might set off the beginning of the one-year statute of limitations to file a lawsuit.
The federal flood insurer made this argument when sending an quantity it decided was owed solely 55 days after the flood loss:
Plaintiff’s swimsuit in opposition to American Bankers is premature. American Bankers first issued the partial denial of Plaintiff’s declare on October 23, 2021. The October 23, 2021 letter suggested Plaintiff that American Bankers was denying protection for prior unrepaired damages, particles and sand within the yard, and gadgets positioned beneath the primary elevated ground. See Exhibit 1. Moreover, the letter additional defined that if Plaintiff wished ‘to take additional motion regarding this denial, the Policyholder Rights doc hooked up to this letter explains your choices…’ See Exhibit 1. Particularly, Plaintiffs had been suggested they might file swimsuit within the Federal District Court docket the place the harm occurred inside one (1) 12 months of when ‘your insurer first denied all or a part of your declare (42 U.S.C. § 4072; 44 C.F.R. § 62.22).’ After receiving Plaintiff’s supplemental proof of loss dated July 26, 2022, American Bankers issued one other letter dated September 26, 2022, rejecting Plaintiff’s proof of loss and reiterating the premise for its partial denial, particularly referring to its October 23, 2021 letter. Plaintiff’s submitting of this lawsuit on September 25, 2023 occurred multiple (1) 12 months after American Bankers first denied a part of Plaintiff’s declare on October 23, 2021. Consequently, Plaintiff’s claims are time barred and topic to dismissal.
The federal choose agreed, discovering:
The Court docket first considers the October 23, 2021 letter. The letter instructed Plaintiff: ‘[I]f you want to take additional motion regarding this denial, the Policyholder Rights doc hooked up to this letter explains your choices, a number of of which require immediate motion.’ The letter particularly ‘denied a portion of [Plaintiff’s] declare based mostly upon the appliable provisions of the Normal Flood Insurance coverage Coverage (SFIP).’ Courts, together with the Fifth Circuit, have repeatedly held that letters with comparable language represent ‘discover[s] of disallowance’ that start the one-year prescriptive interval underneath the Nationwide Flood Insurance coverage Act. Accordingly, the October 23, 2021 letter clearly constitutes a ‘written denial’ or ‘discover of partial disallowance’ that started the one-year prescriptive interval. 1
The underside line is that federal flood claims are very troublesome. The legal guidelines favor the flood insurance coverage service and are strictly construed in order that many claims are misplaced on very technical particulars.
Thought For The Day
Particulars create success.
—Zig Ziglar
1 Hebert v. American Bankers Ins. Co. of Fla., No. 23-5514, 2024 WL 3226109 (E.D. La. June 28, 2024).