Amanda L. Kidd recently represented a small third-party adjusting company that was hired by a Louisiana-based auto insurer to adjust a Florida multi-vehicle accident and multiple competing claims. There was no contract between the two companies or written scope of assignment. Two of the three competing claimants were represented by the same attorney (husband and wife claimants) who presented a time-limited demand to the carrier for the full policy limits, with a check in hand requirement. After ruling out the third claim, the carrier agreed to offer the full policy limits but insisted on executed releases prior to sending the settlement checks. At several points during their relationship, our client gave the carrier advice about how to adjust a claim under Florida law, but never suggested to the carrier that it was not meeting its obligations to act in good faith, nor warned that not strictly complying with the time-limited demands could expose the carrier to liability exceeding the policy limits.
The carrier eventually entered into a settlement agreement with the two claimants for $220,000 above the policy limits, without a lawsuit having ever been filed against the insured or the carrier. The carrier then sued our client, the independent adjusting company, for negligent misrepresentation, professional negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty for their mishandling of the claim. The court ruled that the Plaintiff could not succeed on any of its claims without showing that Defendant proximately caused damages. The damages were the bad faith settlement and related attorneys’ fees. Plaintiff conceded that the only way Defendant could have proximately caused the damages were if Plaintiff acted in bad faith. We argued that this was speculative, at best, under Florida bad faith law and the court agreed. In its order, the court made a quasi-summary judgment finding of no bad faith on the part of the carrier through its excellent analysis of Florida bad faith law.