Facebook-f
Linkedin-in

Adjusting in Good Faith: Property Claim Ethics

Current Status
Not Enrolled
Price
Free
Get Started
Login to Enroll

The “Adjusting in Good Faith: Property Claim Ethics” course teaches insurance professionals about how to adjust property claims in good faith. The module is presented by Nanci Smilie, CPCU, AIC, Property Claims Specialist at Erie Insurance Group, and Jonathan Barger, JD, Senior Associate at Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig.

Each section begins with an overview of a topic related to property claim ethics, such as similarly situated insureds or the duty of good faith and fair dealing. Then the presenters examine a legal case in detail, detailing the facts and walking through the legal arguments. Then the course asks the viewer to consider what they think the outcome will be. Next, there is an exploration of actual case law pertaining to the legal case and the ethical topic in question. Finally, each section ends with a summary of takeaways and a recap.

After completing the course, the attendee will be able to explain the duty of good faith and fair dealing; understand what constitutes a complete investigation; enumerate what types of materials should be included in a claims file; communicate with insureds with professionalism and timeliness; judge whether an insured is similarly situated to another insured; be prepared for the potential risk of adjuster personal liability; and apply case law to facts of a claim. The course is designed for insurance professionals working in the area of property adjusting.

What CE Credit is available?

Note: To qualify for credit, you must submit completion (including a passed final exam if required) within five days of completing the last quiz. No partial credits will be awarded.

State:
Adjuster General CE Hours:
Adjuster Ethics CE Hours:
Attorney General CLE Hours:
State's Course ID:
NH 2.0 - Ethics 485559
TX (classroom equivalent) 1.0 - Ethics 114043
NC 2.0 - Ethics 209450
FL * ( Provider Number: 364169 ) 2.0 - Ethics (Not Approved for 5-Hour requirement) 1183998
IL 0.0 518710
WY 2.0 - Ethics 29521
OK 2.0 - Ethics 6000035701

* This course has been approved by the Florida Department of Financial Services for insurance continuing education credit.

Course Content

Good Faith & Fair Dealing
Expand
Lesson Content
  1. Introduction
  2. Roadmap
  3. How We Will Approach Cases
  4. Ethics
  5. Jurisdiction
  6. Standard
  7. Anderson v. Country Mutual
    1. Facts
    2. Interview
      1. Lies
      2. Denial
    3. Legal
      1. Motion for Summary Judgment
      2. Arguments
    4. Result
      1. Standard
      2. Reasoning
  8. Takeaways
Investigation of Claim
Expand
Lesson Content
  1. Duty
  2. Avoiding Bad Faith
  3. Reasonable Basis
  4. Awadh v. Farm Bureau
    1. Facts
      1. First Investigation
      2. Second Investigation
      3. Denial
    2. Legal
      1. Deposition
      2. Motion for Summary Judgment
    3. Result
      1. Standard
      2. Reasoning
  5. Takeaways
    1. Revisiting Anderson
    2. Reasonableness Is Key
Claim File Documentation
Expand
Lesson Content
  1. Introduction
  2. Contents of Claim File
    1. Daily Log
    2. Communications
    3. Documents
  3. Importance of Claim File
  4. Incomplete Claim Files
  5. Writing Notes
  6. One Place Condo v. Travelers
    1. Facts
      1. Policy
      2. Cause of Loss
      3. Experts
      4. Delay
    2. Legal
    3. Result
      1. Initial Denial
      2. Delay
      3. Claim File
  7. Takeaways
Communication with Insured
Expand
Lesson Content
  1. Introduction
  2. Timing Requirements
  3. Professionalism
  4. Insured Questions
  5. Insured’s Representatives
  6. Dunn v. American Family
  7. Toledano v. Shelter Mutual
    1. Facts
    2. Legal
      1. Motion for Summary Judgment
    3. Result
      1. Standard
      2. Application to Facts
  8. Takeaways
Similarly Situated Insureds
Expand
Lesson Content
  1. Introduction
  2. Discovery
  3. Differences Between Insureds
  4. Avoiding Bad Faith
  5. Williamson v. Chubb
    1. Facts
    2. Legal
      1. Amended Complaint
      2. Motion to Dismiss
      3. Arguments
    3. Results
      1. Standard
      2. Application to Facts
  6. Takeaways
Adjuster Personal Liability
Expand
Lesson Content
  1. Introduction
  2. Not Parties to Contract
  3. Bock v. Hansen
    1. Legal
      1. Arguments
    2. Results
      1. Standard
  4. Split of Authority
  5. Allegrino v. Conway
    1. Breach of Contract
    2. Negligence
    3. Unfair Trade Practices
    4. Brokers
    5. Punitive Damages
  6. Takeaways
  7. Conclusion to Module
Get CE Credit or Certificate of Completion.

Submit within 5 days to get CE Credit or Certificate of Completion.

Click below for bonus content from this course’s sponsor!

Recent Updates

VIEW ALL UPDATES
Building Codes

Does Kaysville, Utah, Residential Building Code Require Ice Barrier Underlayment When Replacing a Roof?

June 26, 2024 By Dan Hartweg QUESTION: For a roofing project in Kaysville, Utah, does the residential building code require ice barrier underlayment? RESPONSE: Yes. The 2021 Utah State Residential Code (USRC) does not require ice barrier underlayment unless there is a history of ice forming along the eaves causing a backup of water, which is left to local jurisdictions to determine and adopt the requirement. 2021 USRC § R905.1.2. Utah did not complete Table R301.2, “Ice Barrier Underlayment Required” column, leaving it to local jurisdictions to complete the table. 2021 USRC Table R301.2. While the Kaysville City Code does not contain any amendments to Table 301.2, according to the Kaysville City Community Development website, ice barrier underlayment is required.  FACTS: Roof repairs at a private residence located in Unincorporated, West Jordan, Utah. DISCUSSION: Utah adopted the 2021 International Residential Code (IRC), including Appendices AE and AQ, with amendments, as the uniform statewide residential code known as the 2021 Utah State Residential Code (USRC) and is part of the mandatory statewide building code, the State Construction Code (SCC). Utah Code § 15A-2-101. (Adoption of SCC); Utah Code §§ 15A-2-103(b), (d), and (m) (adoption); Utah Code §§ 15A-3-101 through 206 (IRC amendments); Utah Code §§ 15A-4-201 through 207 (IRC local amendments); 2021 USRC (ICC page).  The State and its political subdivisions are required to follow the SCC. Utah Code § 15A-1-204(1)(a). The Division administers the SCC, but it is not within the Division's responsibility to enforce it, the responsibility for inspections and enforcement under the SCC fall on the compliance agency. Utah Code § 15A-1-205 (Division duties); Utah Code § 15A-1-207(1) (compliance agency with jurisdiction over project shall inspect and enforce SCC). A compliance agency is defined as an agency of the State or any of its political subdivisions which issues permits for construction regulated under the SCC. Utah Code § 15A-1-202(6). The compliance agency must follow the Division’s established standardized permit system, may charge a fee but must impose a 1% surcharge to help fund Division education efforts, and must promptly review plans and inspect properties. Utah Code § 15A-1-209 (building permit requirements and surcharge); Utah Code § 10-6-160 (municipality may charge fee and must review plans and inspect properties promptly); U.A.C. R156-15A-220 (standardized permits). A search of the subject property on the PLRB address search page indicates that it is located within the City of Kaysville, Utah.  2021 USRC Reroofing Section R908 of the 2021 USRC on Reroofing requires that recovering or replacing an existing roof must comply with the materials and methods outlined for new roofs: 2021 USRC § R908.1. Therefore, the provisions concerning ice barrier underlayment and drip edges in Chapter 9 must be considered.  ICE BARRIER UNDERLAYMENT Ice barrier underlayment is required under Section R905.1.2 where there is a history of ice forming along eaves causing a backup of water as designated in local amendments in Table R301.2: 2021 USRC § R905.1.2.  Utah did not complete Table R301.2 as follows, in relevant part: 2021 USRC Table R301.2. Because no amendment to IRC Table R301.2(1) was made by the legislature, the need for ice barrier underlayment is left to local jurisdictions. Utah Code §§ 15A-3-101 through 206; 2021 USRC Table R301.2. Kaysville City adopted the current version of the International Residential Code adopted by the State of Utah. Kaysville City Code § 18-2-2. The City did not adopt any amendments to Table 301.2. Id., see also, Kaysville City Code Title 18, Chapter 3. However, according to the City’s website, ice barrier underlayment is required. Kaysville City, Community Development, Roofing Requirements.  DISCUSSION: Utah adopted the 2021 International Residential Code (IRC), as amended, as the 2021 Utah State Residential Code (USRC) and part of the 2021 Utah State Construction Code, a uniform statewide code. The state did not complete Table R301.2, leaving the decision to require ice barrier underlayment up to local jurisdictions where there has been a history of ice forming along eaves causing a backup of water. While the Kaysville City Code does not contain an amendment to Table R301.2, according to the Kaysville City Community Development website, ice barrier underlayment is required.

LEARN MORE
Liability Legal News

AZ – STATUTORY BULLETIN – New Arizona Law Modifies Certain Minimum Limits that Apply to Transportation Network Services (e.g., Uber) and Services Involving Taxis, Livery Vehicles, and Limousines

Recently, Arizona's Governor signed into law House Bill 2729, which (1) addresses transportation network companies (TNCs) (e.g., Uber) and their drivers and (2) modifies the minimum required limits for commercial motor vehicle liability insurance and commercial uninsured motorist coverage. See Ariz. Stat. § 28-4038(B). The new law also (1) addresses taxi companies, livery vehicle companies, and limousine companies and the drivers of such vehicles and (2) modifies the minimum required limits for commercial uninsured motorist coverage. See Ariz. Stat. § 28-4039(A)(2). The new law takes effect on September 14, 2024.   

LEARN MORE
Liability Question of the Week

Is there a Duty to Defend the Insureds Against the Plaintiff's Complaint that Alleges Damages Due to the Movement of Water, Debris, and Unstable Soils onto the Plaintiff's Property?

The Plaintiff's Complaint alleges that the Defendants "built a house on the uphill property from Plaintiff" and that, during the policy period of the Defendants' Homeowners Policy, "[the] Plaintiff became aware that water, debris, mud, unstable soils and other materials slipped, slid and/or moved from Defendants' property onto Plaintiff's property." The question is whether the insurer is required to defend the homeowners against this Complaint, which asserts negligence and trespass claims against the homeowners.    

LEARN MORE
Property Legal News

Thompson v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. (2024)

(United States District Court for the District of Maryland, applying MD law) Note that this case was decided by a U.S. District Court, a trial court in the federal court system. Its opinion is not binding precedent, but it may be cited as persuasive authority.

LEARN MORE

Stay Connected

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

EXPLORE MEMBERSHIP
Contact & Help

Copyright © Property & Liability Resource Bureau 2024