Category: General Hurricane Dispute Information

  • Court to Katrina Flood Victim: Follow the Rules When Making an Insurance Claim

    As many Gulf Coast residents unfortunately know, standard homeowner’s insurance policies do not include coverage for flooding. In order to assist property owners in Louisiana and other states in protecting themselves against floods from hurricanes, tropical storms, and other severe weather, Congress created the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in 1968. NFIP offers flood insurance to homeowners, renters, and commercial property owners in communities that participate in the NFIP. In order for a community to be eligible to participate, it must agree to adopt and enforce certain building standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flood damage. According to the NFIP, flood damage is reduced by nearly $1 billion each year as a result of the floodplain management standards implemented by these communities. Also, structures that are built to NFIP standards experience approximately 80 percent less damage annually than those not built to the standards. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) manages the administrative functions of the NFIP, including the claims process. As one Katrina victim recently learned, homeowners who file claims under the NFIP must closely follow the rules contained in their policies.

    Violet Collins, a resident of New Orleans, maintained a flood insurance policy through the NFIP to cover her house and its contents. The structure was insured for $225,000 and the contents for $12,500. When the home sustained flood damage during Hurricane Katrina, Collins contacted FEMA to provide notification of the damage. FEMA sent an adjuster to her house to inspect the damage and arrange for payment from FEMA. Collins later submitted additional documentation for damage that the adjuster had overlooked, and FEMA issued her two more checks. Some time later, Collins filed a suit against the NFIP which alleged that the payments on her flood claims were insufficient. The NFIP filed a motion for summary judgment on the basis that Collins failed to file a proof of loss as required by the insurance policy and was therefore barred from seeking additional money. The district court granted NFIP’s motion, and Collins appealed.

    After reaffirming that it must “strictly construe and enforce” the flood policy’s requirements, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals asserted that “an insured’s failure to provide a complete, sworn proof of loss statement, as required by the flood insurance policy, relieves the federal insurer’s obligation to pay what otherwise might be a valid claim.” Gowland v. Aetna, 143 F.3d 951, 954 (5th Cir. 1998). The court noted that, ordinarily, the proof must be submitted within 60 days of the loss, but that FEMA extended the window for Hurricane Katrina claims to one year. Nevertheless, Collins never submitted any proof of loss; the court examined Collins’s arguments for why she was not required to file one. Her first argument was that FEMA had waived the requirement altogether, a contention that the court quickly dispensed with by citing well-settled case law on the same question. Second, Collins asserted that the NFIP waived the filing requirement in a letter she received from an insurance adjuster. However, the court concluded this was not possible because “federal regulations provide that no provision of the policy may be altered, varied, or waived without the express written consent of the Federal Insurance Administrator,” which was not given. Finally, Collins argued that because she suffers from a debilitating eye disease, she was excused from observing the filing requirement. In response, the unsympathetic court stated that “Collins, however, fails to explain why Louisiana tort law would apply to her claim for flood insurance proceeds or why, if applicable, this would exempt her from our precedent requiring strict compliance with the … proof-of-loss requirements.” Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Collins’s suit.

    This case serves as a reminder that, even in the aftermath of such massive natural disasters as Hurricane Katrina, flood victims are still expected to follow the specific requirements of their NFIP insurance policies when seeking payment for flood-related losses. Although it may seem cruel to reject a flood victim’s appeal for a fair pay-out, the courts have put policyholders on notice that they will not entertain requests to alter the terms of the policies. For this reason, victims of any flood should seek the help of a qualified attorney who can help them navigate the steps required to fully collect on their flood insurance policies.

    (more…)

  • Louisiana Residents With Personal Injury Questions

    For those Louisiana residents, whether you live in Lake Charles, Shreveport, Baton Rouge, New Orleans, Kentwood or any other of the great cities across this state, looking for more information on their possible personal injury claim, check out our blog dedicated to these legal matters:

    Louisiana Personal Injury Blog

    This blog discusses the legal issues relating to Admiralty/Maritime law, Animal/Dog Bites, Car Accidents, Chemical/Industrial Spills, the intricacies of Expert Testimony, Insurance Disputes, employee rights under the Jones Act, Legal Duty, Civil Lawsuits, Criminal prosecution, Medical Malpractice, Mesothelioma/Asbestos, Motorcycle Injury, Negligence, Offshore Accidents, Product Defects, Chinese Drywall, Strict Liability, Workers’ Compensation and Wrongful Death. All of these issues are crucial to citizens rights and residents of Louisiana.

    To better understand the complexity of the law, contacting an attorney is crucial. However, to get a better understanding of the general issues, we hope this resource is invaluable. Feel free to browse this legal resource dealing with a variety of harms or damages you may have suffered in order to understand how your issue matches up with the law.

    If you would like to speak with an attorney, check out our contact information. We represent Louisiana residents across the state and would be happy to discuss with you how to move forward with your unfortunate circumstances.

  • News In Short: WSJ commends Duval ruling, encourages gov’t to settle with Katrina flood victims

    The Wall Street Journal, in its editorial section yesterday, commended Judge Duval for finding the Army Corps of Engineers at fault for the flooding of areas of New Orleans. The editorial, entitled ‘A win for New Orleans,’ celebrates the win as an opportunity for those whose homes flooded to receiving financial settlements to make up for the inability of the Corps to develop and operate adequate water projects.

    The lawsuit was brought by seven plaintiffs. Judge Duval ruled against the plaintiffs from New Orleans East but awarded $720,000 to those from St. Bernard and the Lower Ninth.

    The judge’s decision could lead to thousands of people joining class actions seeking billions of dollars in damages. Lawyers for the plaintiffs are calling on the federal government to offer a universal settlement with the people of New Orleans. The Obama administration and members of Congress should listen. While there are limits on how much people should expect — the government is strapped for cash, after all — it’s difficult to see what purpose would be served by dragging this case through appeals all the way up to the Supreme Court. Unless the government has a persuasive defense for the negligence decried by Judge Duval, it would be better to settle now.

    This is a good sign that the national press is following Gulf Coast issues closely and hopefully people get the results they are looking for in terms of more Corps attention and effort into improving the water systems. Any progress and attention to issues relating to New Orleans and its recovery, though, is positive and hopefully will help lead to those efforts that prevent the devastation of Katrina from occurring again.

  • Governor Jindal responds to federal ruling on Army Corps of Engineers failure

    Governor Bobby Jindal has responded to U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval Jr.’s ruling that the flooding of areas within New Orleans was the direct fault of the Army Corps of Engineers inability to develop and execute proper water resource projects within Louisiana. The press release, posted below, condemns the Corps for their failure and is a strongly worded encouragement of the Corps to rectify and improve its efforts in the near future.

    The Office of the Governor states

    Baton Rouge: Governor Bobby Jindal issued the following statement regarding the ruling by U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval Jr. that the Army Corps of Engineers’ was directly responsible for flood damage to portions of the New Orleans region following Hurricane Katrina because of their failure to properly operate and maintain water resources projects in Louisiana:

    “This ruling highlights the fact that Hurricane Katrina’s damage was exacerbated by the failure of the Corps of Engineers to properly operate and maintain water resources projects in Louisiana. There are very real and human implications of the failure to quickly solve challenges and address vulnerabilities in our hurricane protection system. I hope this decision will serve as a catalyst for the Corps, Congress and the Administration to aggressively move forward on hurricane protection and coastal restoration efforts in Louisiana.”

    While Judge Stanwood Duval Jr.’s ruling is progressive in the sense it keeps the matter from simply being blamed on the unknown, the development of the levee and water systems around New Orleans is the most important thing that can happen in the coming months and years to protect the city from future harm. Our firm can only hope that Corps will learn from its mistakes and help make the state safer from flooding in the future.

  • 2008 Hurricane claims continue to end up in Gulf Coast courts

    Hurricane insurance claims continue to be filed in the Gulf Coast, this time in Texas. The Southeast Texas Record reports a wide assortment of filings over the last week of October. Examples include:

    Joseph and Julia Crow of Beaumont allege Texas Windstorm Insurance Association denied their claim for roof, water, wind, foundation, structural and contents damages caused to their home after Hurricane Ike struck on Sept. 13, 2008. TWIA denied the claim after its Vice President of Claims Reggie Warren assigned adjusters to investigate.

    June Jennings of 1908 North 21st St. in Nederland alleges Texas Windstorm Insurance Association improperly paid her claim for dwelling and contents damages caused to her home after Hurricane Ike struck on Sept. 13, 2008.

    These two cases highlight a common thread in insurance disputes: claim denials and low-ball financial compensation offers. Further, many insurance companies hope that homeowners do not know how long they have to file and try to convince them that a low settlement is the only solution. In many cases this is simply not the case and accepting such an offer is disastrous.

    The Berniard Law Firm is very familiar with attacking both of these strategies when its clients are taken advantage of by the insurance companies and employs a myriad of experts that will help you receive the justice you deserve.

  • Energy firms not seeking insurance against disasters

    The Wall Street Journal reports that companies in the Gulf and outside of it are not seeking insurance for catastrophe this hurricane season. Citing “improved technology and increased regulations” as rationale for avoiding the provisions, these companies still stand at some peril as hurricane season escalates. The article notes

    Many energy companies are facing the late-blooming Gulf Coast hurricane season without insurance against storm damage to their offshore platforms, pipelines and drilling rigs.

    Although the annual storm season has been mild so far, the first hurricane, Bill, brewed up in the Atlantic last weekend, and federal forecasters are predicting three to six hurricanes this year, one or two of which will probably qualify as major.

    Consumers are less likely than in earlier years to see spiking prices if hurricanes hit, experts said, because big stockpiles of oil, natural gas and gasoline have built up in the U.S. since the recession began.

    But for small and midsize energy companies, a storm’s impact could be serious, because they would have to pay for repairs out of their own pockets at a time when revenues have been shrinking because of the global slump in oil and natural-gas prices.

    This seems to be similar to the gamble that states are taking for reinsurance, as mentioned in the blog here. All the more, very close attention is going to be paid to developing storms as the season rolls on and the gambles states and companies are taking either pay off or blow up in their faces.

  • CNN Money: 5 Tips in the event of hurricane damage

    An article from 2005 while Hurricane Katrina raged through the States remains relevant today.

    In today’s five tips, we’re going to tell you what you need to know about your insurance if your home as been damaged or destroyed in the hurricane.

    1. Contact your insurer, stat.
    2. Document, document, document.
    3. Live with it…for now.
    4. Watch out for scammers.
    5. Protest your settlement.

    Each tip carries with it a brief description of what to do. Take, for instance, CNN’s suggestion for “Living with it now”

    Make only temporary repairs before the insurance adjustor has a chance to come in and access the damage. Of course you should not compromise your safety. But if you have a leaky roof, just put some pots and pans around instead of having the damage fixed by a professional.

    This is a good way to make sure that you are reimbursed for any repair. If you are currently underinsured or you have a sizable unreinbursed property loss estimate, you may be able to deduct this from your taxes.

    First, subtract any insurance you anticipate receiving. Then subtract $100. The loss must be further reduced by 10 percent of your adjusted gross income, according to Tom Ochsenschlager of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The balance remaining is what you can deduct from your taxes.

    Just some things to keep in mind in case hurricane season doesn’t remain as quiet as it has been.

  • States rolling dice by not seeking reinsurance

    The New York Times recently brought up a casualty of the economic climate facing many states: the cost/benefit analysis being made by states in regards to insurance against dangerous storms. Often extremely costly and unnecessary, this reinsurance looks to bolster defenses against disastrous natural calamities but, with budget cuts at a premium, states are beginning to count every dollar and looking to go without.

    Public insurance programs in some coastal states are flirting with the notion of saving millions of dollars every year by shrinking or canceling the coverage they buy from private reinsurers — the deep-pocketed companies that insure insurers whose exposure to loss exceeds the budgets of some nations.

    States are the insurers in this case. And they are either tired of paying piles of cash for reinsurance policies that are rarely needed, or too broke financially to maintain coverage that has saved state residents from paying billions in hurricane damage claims. In the parlance of the insurance business, without coverage or a hedge against their expensive risks, they are “running naked.”

    Here’s the bet: Save hundreds of millions with no disaster, or pay perhaps billions with one.

    Two of the nation’s biggest states are looking to gamble on the odds of a disaster-free summer:

    Texas let its policy die at the end of May, less than a year after reinsurers paid $1.5 billion in claims related to Hurricane Ike. That’s not a bad return on the state’s investment. Texans paid $180 million for the policy.

    Texas will buck this hurricane season with no reinsurance.

    California is also looking to reduce its coverage.

    Overall an unfortunate situation that will leave many state budget workers hoping they made the right decision, depending on what decision they make.

  • House extends National Flood Insurance Program

    A quick news blurb regarding a topic we brought up earlier: the nearing expiration of the National Flood Insurance Program. Such an expiration has been delayed another six months as the House agreed to extend the program through the 2009 hurricane season:

    Set to expire on Sept. 30, the House approved a six-month extension to March 31, 2010. The Senate and president must approve the extension.

    The NFIP bill (HR 3139) was sponsored by House Financial Services Housing Subcommittee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D.-Calif.) and committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.).

    In March, President Barack Obama extended the program through September just as it was about to expire. Frank and Waters introduced the new legislation in July for a second extension, citing the importance of the program following Hurricane Katrina and other storms that devastated the Gulf Coast.

    Definitely a good thing.

  • Timeline anew for Katrina lawsuits

    Catching up on June happenings, it is important for those individuals affected by Hurricane Katrina to know that the timeline in which they may file for claims involving damage from the epic storm has been reset.

    From NOLA.com

    The class action allegations against insurers in the consolidated levee breach litigation have been dismissed, restarting the clock for anyone who is dissatisfied with the results of their Katrina claim and allowing them to file a lawsuit against their insurer nearly four years after the storm.

    Home and business owners and renters had two years to file lawsuits against insurers over claim disputes after the Aug. 29, 2005, storm. Class action lawsuit filings stop the legal clock by covering the rights of all potential members of a class, but if that petition fails to get certified as a class or individual defendants get cut from the proceedings, plaintiffs’ individual legal rights to pursue similar claims are restored.

    On Tuesday (June 16), U.S. District Court Judge Stanwood R. Duval Jr. granted a request by insurers to be severed from the Katrina Canal Breaches Consolidated Litigation, saying that disputes against insurers were individual, and not suitable to be handled as part of a class action.

    It is important for Louisiana homeowners to work immediately to look for legal action should they not have already and hold insurers responsible in the event their homes were damaged. Late answers to policy claims and frivolous delays or demands should
    be answered by demanding the rights promised to them by the country’s judicial system and contacting an attorney should working through their agent be stonewalled is the most definitive and proper action.