Florida Supreme Court Rules Against Insurer in Concurrent Loss Case

By | December 6, 2016

  • December 6, 2016 at 8:57 am
    Mr. Solvent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 0

    I’m assuming this was an HO5 contract. It doesn’t even begin to surprise me that the court ruled in this manner.

  • December 6, 2016 at 2:22 pm
    Little Frog says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 0

    I would very much like to know, when this is done, the final figure owed by the policy and to what extent Am Home can subrogate for the contributory design defects.

    • December 7, 2016 at 8:51 am
      Mr. Solvent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 0

      This would have been done had Am Home not simply rubber stamped a claim denial. Insurance companies behaving badly have created crippling case law that keeps rates high for everyone.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published.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

*