In Bioscience West, Inc. v. Gulfstream Property & Casualty Insurance Co., No. 2D14-3946, 2016 WL 455723 (Fla. 2d DCA Feb. 5, 2016), the Second District held that the insured’s post-loss assignment of benefits of her homeowner’s insurance policy without the consent of her insurer was permissible.

The insured purchased a homeowner’s insurance policy that contained policy language prohibiting the assignment of the policy without the insurer’s consent. The insured’s home subsequently sustained water damage and the insured hired an emergency water mitigation company to perform services. The insured then executed an assignment of benefits which authorized the water mitigation company to directly bill and receive payment from the insurer under the policy. The trial court held that the insured was precluded from assigning benefits of the homeowner’s policy to the water mitigation company without the consent of the insurer.

On appeal, the Second District reversed and held that the language of the policy merely prohibited the insured’s unilateral assignment of the entire policy, not a financial benefit derived from the policy. The Court further held that Florida law prohibits an insurer from restricting an insured’s unilateral post-loss assignment of a benefit derived from policy. The Court reasoned that there is no contractual language restricting or prohibiting the post-loss assignment of benefits without the insurer’s consent and that post-loss insurance claims are freely assignable without the insurer’s consent.

If you have any questions about this case or would like to refer an appellate matter, please contact our appellate attorneys.