Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...3 that purchasing the policy from the loan provider is not a prerequisite to obtaining the loan. F LA. STAT. ANN. § 627.679(1)(c)(1) (2002). In addition, London alleged that the Appellants violated Florida Statutes section 627.410, which requires that all insurance application forms be filed with and approved by the Florida DOI before use, and section 627.682, which applies the same requirements to applications for credit life insurance. F LA. STAT. ANN. §§ 627.410, 627.682 (2002)....

...5 insurance commissioner, in violation of Florida law, rendered the endorsement void. 213 So. 2d at 749-50. The district court found that under Illingworth, a party’s violation of Florida Statutes sections 627.410 and 627.682 would make the contracts at issue void and unenforceable. The district court also found that Bankers was an “agent” for purposes of section 627.679(1)(c)(1), making the statute’s disclosure requirements binding on Bankers. The court found that Chase and Bankers violated sections 627.410 and 627.682 and by failing to file a copy of the “Take-One” in-store application forms with the DOI prior to using the forms....

...§ 627.415 (“Any policy provision in violation of this section [about charter, bylaw provisions] is invalid.”). In other sections, the Legislature has crafted specific remedies for an insurance company’s noncompliance with a statutory requirement. See, e.g., § 627.410(7)(e), Fla....

...Section 627.428(1), Florida Statutes (1975), provides for an attorney's fee in certain insurance cases, but Section 627.401(2) says that the above provision shall not apply as to: Policies or contracts not issued for delivery in this state nor delivered in this state, except as provided in § 627.410(6) (approval of forms for delivery in jurisdictions where local approval not provided for)....

...rter, bylaw provisions] is invalid."). The legislature also provides for other kinds of penalties aside from voiding the provision. In some sections, the legislature crafts specific remedies for the insurance company's noncompliance. For example, in Section 627.410(e), the legislature made the penalty for failing to meet the filing requirements, allowing the Department of Insurance to "order the insurer to discontinue the issuance of policies for which the required filing was not made, until such time as the office determines that the required filing is properly submitted." It also allowed the Department of Insurance to issue this penalty "in addition to any other penalty authorized by law." Section 627.410(e)....

...Stat. (1987) (providing that any person who knew or reasonably should have known that an insurance contract was entered into in violation of this section, is liable to the insured for the full amount of the claim unpaid by an unauthorized insurer); and § 627.410(1), Fla....

...§ 627.415 (“Any policy provision in violation of this section [about charter, bylaw provisions] is invalid.”). In other sections, the Legislature has crafted specific remedies for an insurance company’s noncompliance with a statutory requirement. See, e.g., § 627.410(7)(e), Fla. Stat. § 627.410(7)(3), Fla....

...nd more time-consuming rulemaking. They are: 1. an adverse administrative ruling; 2. the department's computerization effort; 3. the large number of filings to be processed; 4. the short period permitted the agency to review such filings pursuant to section 627.410(2), Florida Statutes....

...or welfare. As the agency has failed to provide any specifics regarding the increased filings, this justification for the emergency rule also does not withstand judicial scrutiny. The agency's reliance on the short statutory review period refers to section 627.410(2), Florida Statutes (Supp....

...ould bolster the agency's argument that an emergency rule might be necessary to avoid "default" approvals for failure to provide timely review. Absent an adequate showing of an emergency created by the number of filings, however, the requirements of section 627.410(2) do not support an emergency rule....

...Blasband, 534 So.2d 901 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), review denied, 542 So.2d 1332 (Fla. 1989). We note the absence of any allegation in the record that the form used by Prudential was neither submitted to nor approved by the Department of Insurance as required by section 627.410, Florida Statutes (Supp....

...eging that the above-quoted exclusions were unenforceable because Essex had not complied with two Florida statutes: the defendants pointed out that Essex had failed to file and obtain preapproval of the combination general endorsement as required by section 627.410, Florida Statutes (2008), and they alleged that Essex had failed to comply with Florida’s claims administration statute, section 627.426....

...o warn, and vicarious liability. The parties subsequently filed cross-motions for summary judgment. *950 At the hearing on the motions and in their memoranda, the parties focused on Verizon’s and Mastec’s defense that Essex had not complied with section 627.410. 1 Essex argued that because it was a surplus lines carrier, 2 see § 626.913, Fla. Stat. (2008), it was exempt from the filing and approval requirements of section 627.410....

...Accordingly, it held that the balance of chapter 627 did apply to surplus lines carriers. Id. at 1044 . Zota was followed in August 2008 by an Eleventh Circuit decision, CNL Hotels & Resorts. Inc. v. Twin City Fire Insurance Co., 291 Fed.Appx. 220 (11th Cir.2008), which addressed section 627.410, the filing requirements statute at issue here. The CNL court relied on Zota and concluded that section 627.410 applied to surplus lines carriers....

...ations, or imposes new penalties.” Lafor-et, 658 So.2d at 61 . The appellees here maintain that retroactive application of section 626.913 would impair their vested rights to have policy terms preapproved by the Office of Insurance Regulation. See § 627.410....

...would prevent section 626.913 from being retroactively applied. In sum, we hold that: (I) the 2009 amendment to section 626.913 applies retroactively; (II) such retroactive application is not unconstitutional; and (III) fail *953 ure to comply with section 627.410 does not invalidate the policy exclusions....

...is void."); Section 627.415 (stating that "[a]ny policy provision in violation of this section [about charter, bylaw provisions] is invalid.")." Chalfonte, 526 F.Supp.2d at 1256. In other sections, specific remedies are provided: "[f]or example, in Section 627.410(e), the legislature made the penalty for failing to meet the filing requirements, allowing the Department of Insurance to "order the insurer to discontinue the issuance of policies for which the required filing was not made, until suc...

...ged as a necessary market mechanism. Surplus lines insurance is property and casualty coverage that is underwritten by a nonadmitted insurer for nonstandard risks or policy levels that are unavailable in the commercial market.” Id. . Florida Stat. § 627.410(1) requires an insurer to gain the Office's approval of a "basic insurance policy” before an insurer may sell a policy. Section 626.913(4), excuses a surplus line policy from Chapter 627, including the approval requirement in Section 627.410....

...Finally, we turn to appellants' contention that the application for insurance cannot be relied upon by the insurer as the basis for its misrepresentation charge because there was no proof that the form had been approved by the Department of Insurance as required by section 627.410, Florida Statutes (1963)....

...On the merits, the pollution exclusions for the policy years now before us exclude the County's claims. The policies at issue here were, at a minimum, of a unique character such that they did not require approval by the Florida Department of Insurance. See § 627.410(1), Fla....

...nder the bankruptcy settlement agreement, I respectfully dissent. Appellees are barred from relying on the pollution exclusion because they failed to submit the form for the various exclusions to the Florida Department of Insurance as required under Section 627.410, Florida Statutes (2001). Section 627.410(1) provides: No basic insurance policy or annuity contract form, or application form where written application is required and is to be made a part of the policy or contract, or group certificates issued under a master contract delive...

...ent. This provision does not apply to surety bonds or to policies, riders, endorsements, or forms of unique character which are designed for and used with relation to insurance upon a particular subject ... Appellees make several arguments as to why § 627.410 does not apply, of which only two merit a brief discussion: that the policies were not delivered in Florida and that the policies were of so unique a character as to avoid the filing requirements. Appellees first claim that § 627.410 does not apply because the policies were issued to Pan American World Airways (Pan Am) at its principal place of business in New York and not delivered or issued for delivery in Florida....

...4th DCA 1987) (interpreting the holding in Cooper to say that "if it is found that the policy was written to cover risks that would occur in Florida, then it will be assumed the policy was issued for delivery in Florida"). Furthermore, the policies were not of such a unique character as to avoid the filing requirement of § 627.410....

...Section 627.092 creates the position of a Workers' Compensation Administrator whose job is "to monitor carrier practices in the field of workers' compensation." Workers' compensation rates require the prior approval of the Department of Insurance, see § 627.091, the policy forms must also be approved by the Department, see § 627.410, and excessive, inadequate, or unfairly discriminatory rates must be disapproved by the Department, see § 627.062....

...nt record without additional findings by the district court. *1346 II. ANALYSIS In the present Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendants argue that (1) Zota was not an employee of Lighthouse; (2) Plaintiff did not follow the requirements of Fla. Stat. § 627.410 and as a result, the endorsement exclusions are void; (3) the terms contractor, builder and developer are not defined in the policy and are ambiguous, but if not ambiguous, do not apply because Lighthouse was the owner of the property....

...Darby, 911 F.2d 1573,1577 (11th Cir.1990). If the evidence advanced by the non-moving party "is merely colorable, or is not significantly probative, then summary judgment may be granted." Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249-50, 106 S.Ct. 2505. A. The Requirements of Florida Statute § 627.410 Florida Statute § 627.410(1) provides that: No basic insurance policy or annuity contract form, or application form where written application is required and is to be made a part of the policy or contract, or group certificates issued under a master contract delive...

...As to group insurance policies effectuated and delivered outside this state but covering persons resident in this state, the group certificates to be delivered or issued for delivery in this state shall be filed with the office for information purposes only. Plaintiff argues that § 627.410(1) does not apply to surplus lines insurers because it is trumped by and conflicts with § 626.923....

...4.) Plaintiffs argument is supported by the affidavits of Steven H. Parton and Gary Pullen. Gary Pullen is the Executive Director of the Florida Surplus Lines Service Office. Mr. Pullen states that his office has never required surplus lines insurers to comply with § 627.410 nor does the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation ("OIR") intend to require compliance with this statute even after the opinion in Essex Ins. Co. v. Zota, 985 So.2d 1036 (Fla.2008). (Pullen Affidavit, DE 203, p. 5-6.) Steven Parton is presently General Counsel for the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation. He maintains that § 627.410 applies to authorized insurers while §§ 626.913-626.937 apply to surplus lines insurers....

...Parton states that § 626.916(1)(c) [2] requires surplus lines insurers to file a form with the Office for review. The only other filing requirement is in House Bill 601 introduced in the 2008 Regular Session. ( Id. ) The argument that the legislature did not intend for § 627.410 to apply to surplus lines insurance was presented to the Eleventh Circuit in CNL Hotels & *1348 Resorts, Inc. v. Twin City Fire Ins. Co., 291 Fed. Appx. 220 (11th Cir. Aug. 18, 2008). The CNL Court found that § 627.410 applied to surplus lines insurance and remanded the case to determine whether an endorsement was void because it was not filed with the OIR....

...7, demonstrate that the exclusionary provisions of section 627.021(2) only relate to "the ratings laws of part I, chapter 627, F.S.," as this Court has previously held ... Zota II, 985 So.2d at 1042. Therefore, part II of Chapter 627, which includes § 627.410, applies to surplus lines insurers. Plaintiff argues that even if § 627.410 applies, then § 626.923 [4] would create an exception to the extent that surplus line insurers are required to file policy forms and have them approved only upon request by the OIR. (Plaintiffs Response, DE 202, p. 5.) Defendants argue that there is no inconsistency between §§ 626.923 and 627.410 because § 627.410 discusses approval of policy forms before an insurance policy is issued and § 626.923 deals with filing a copy of a policy after issuance. (Defendants' Reply, DE 221, p. 5-6.) Defendants assert that the requirements of § 626.923 are in addition to the requirements of § 627.410. ( Id. at p. 6.) Because the Eleventh Circuit and the Florida Supreme Court determined that § 627.410 applies to surplus lines insurance, the Court finds *1349 that the most plausible reading of the statutes is as Defendants explain, the statutes both apply in different circumstances....

...from the obligations of chapter 627. (Response, DE 202, p. 13-17.) However, this legislation has not yet passed and has no impact on this action. The present state of the law as analyzed by the Eleventh Circuit and the Florida Supreme Court is that § 627.410 applies to surplus lines insurers. Having determined that Fla. Stat. § 627.410 applies to surplus lines insurers, the Court must now determine what remedy or penalty, if any, results from Plaintiffs admitted failure to abide by the statute's filing requirements. (Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, Exhibit K, DE 188-3, p. 4.) The CNL Court, citing Zota II, found that § 627.410(1) applies to surplus lines insurance and remanded to the district court to determine whether the endorsement was void because it was not filed with the OIR....

...In light of the language in Block Marina and Zota I, this Court must refrain from any alteration of the terms of the insurance contract. Consequently, the Court finds itself in the position of finding that voiding is not the appropriate remedy for failing to abide by the filing requirements, but having no guidance in § 627.410 for what an appropriate remedy or penalty should be. Plaintiff argues that rescission is the only available remedy for its failure to comply with § 627.410. (Response, DE 202, p. 6.) Rescinding the policy would require a refund of premiums and no coverage for this accident. ( Id. at p. 7.) Plaintiff notes that operation of § 627.410 would result in the voiding of the entire policy because Essex failed to file the policy with the OIR....

...There is no evidence of fraud, accident or mistake in the record. As a result, rescission of the entire Policy is not a proper remedy. Another possible solution identified by Plaintiff is that pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 627.418, noncompliance with Fla. Stat. § 627.410 should not invalidate an otherwise valid policy provision....

...Notably, Judge Middlebrooks did not void the deductible provision because construing the Insurance Code as a whole, an appropriate penalty could be some kind of fine from the Department of Insurance. Id. at 1257. Here, the Court has determined that Fla. Stat. § 627.410 applies and was violated. Yet, there is no express penalty for violation of the statute. The only case addressing a penalty for violation of Fla. Stat. § 627.410 is Am....

...use was a "builder" or "contractor." 2. Defendants Lighthouse Intracoastal, Inc., Jack Farji and Broward Executive Builders, Inc.' Amended and Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 188] is GRANTED IN PART. The Court finds that: (1) Florida Statute § 627.410 applies to surplus lines insurers and Essex was required to abide by the statute's filing requirements; (2) the term "developer" as that term is used in the exclusionary endorsement is ambiguous and Lighthouse is therefore found not to be...

...Golden Rule Insurance Company (Golden Rule) appeals an administrative order, entered by Insurance Commissioner Tom Gallagher, approving Golden Rule’s rate revision filing as of the date of the final order and rejecting the hearing officer’s recommendation that the filing be deemed approved pursuant to section 627.410, Florida Statutes. Appellant contends that the Insurance Commissioner erred in granting the rate revision filing as of the date of the final order rather than deeming the filing approved 30 days after the filing was received by the Department, as required by section 627.410, Florida Statutes....

...Consequently, under the Office’s interpretation, an insurer must offer optional sinkhole loss coverage on an insured structure to the extent provided in the base policy. The term “form” is not defined in either section 627.706 or elsewhere in the Insurance Code. However, under section 627.410(1), Florida Statutes, which requires insurers to submit all insurance forms to the Office for approval, a “form” can be a “basic insurance policy,” or a policy “endorsement,” or one of several other policy-related documents. See § 627.410(1), Fla....

...Each policy includes the warning. The complaint asserts that the insurers failed to report the policy to the Office in accord with Chapter 627. Specifically, the complaint asserts a violation of Sections 627.062 and 627.0651, each in part I of Chapter 627, and a violation of Section 627.410(1), in part II. In 2008 the Florida Supreme Court concluded that surplus line insurance must comply with all of Chapter 627 except for part I. Zota I, 985 So.2d 1036,1041-44 . Surplus line insurance may ignore Sections 627.062 and 627.0651. Applying Section 627.410(1) is trickier. Section 627.410(1) requires an insurer to gain the Office’s approval of a “basic insurance policy” before the insurer may sell the policy. Reversing the Florida Supreme Court, a recent law, Section 626.913(4), excuses a surplus line policy from Chapter 627, including the approval requirement in Section 627.410....

...the two policies and the underwriters, the insurers of each policy, arose later, in June, 2009. Lemy in effect began a new action after the surplus line exemption from Chapter 627 began, see (Doc. 96 at 3-4), and the claim that the insurers violated Section 627.410(1) therefore fails....

...Because we conclude that the OIR abused its discretion in not granting National States leave to amend its petition, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. OIR notified National States that it had not submitted its annual rate certification filing for certain long-term care insurance policies as required under section 627.410(7)(a), Florida Statutes (2005), and, pursuant to section 627.410(7)(e), ordered National States to cease selling those insurance policies until the OIR determined that the required filing has been properly submitted....

...gton did not seek approval of its policy from the Office of Insurance Regulation. (Prescott's Supplemental Brief at 6-8). Prescott does not specify what portion of its policy Lexington should have submitted to the Office of Insurance Regulation, but § 627.410(1) requires a surplus-lines insurer to receive approval for specific kinds of policies and clauses. See Essex Ins. Co., 985 So.2d at 1041-43. Prescott's claim Lexington failed to comply with § 627.410(1) is conclusory and unsupported by affidavit or other evidence. Section 627.410(1) only applies to a "basic insurance policy" and excludes "policies....

...s a surplus line policy to include two specific disclaimers; Section 626.916(l)(a), which requires a diligent search for a general line before the sale of a surplus line; Sections 627.062 and 627.0651, which regulate a general line policy’s price; Section 627.410, which requires a general line insurer to report policy information to the Office of Insurance Regulation (“the Office”); and Section 627.8405, which prohibits the financing of an automobile club membership or of a product “not regulated” by the insurance code....