The Friday, July 30th Rule workshop was attended by some of Florida’s most influential trade associations for the purpose of discussing various proposed rule revisions governing Emergency Licensing, Conduct of Public Adjusters and Public Adjuster Apprentices, and the Adjuster Code of Ethics.

Leading the testimony was James W. Greer, CPCU, President of Florida’s Association of Property & Casualty Claims Professionals (PCCP) and Executive Director of Florida’s Association of Workers’ Compensation Claims Professionals (WCCP). Addressing the interests of more than 76,200 Florida-licensing resident and non-resident adjusters, Mr. Greer cited strenuous objection to the addition of Rule 69B-220.201(3)(f) and stressed the need for integrity of the Code of Ethics as a standard of behavior. According to Greer, procedural rules such as that provided are best [and currently] addressed in Florida’s Unfair Claims Practices Statutes. Mr. Greer also asked if the rule changes were specifically aimed at issues arising out of the public adjuster community or all adjusters. DFS officials cited problems with both company, independent and public adjusters, but did admit that the problems mostly arise out of difficulties experienced after Florida’s 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons.

Additional testimony was provided by Liz Reynolds, CPCU, NAMIC Southeast State Affairs Manager, Sam Miller, Executive Vice President, Florida Insurance Council, William H. Stander, Assistant Vice President, Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. All trade associations supported Greer’s testimony, citing the specific requirements of F.S. §626.9541 and F.S. §627.71031, although some went even further, objecting the use of certain terms and grammatical construction in many of the ethical rules that have been in existence for years and citing vagueness, ambiguity and the potential for abuse and litigation.

Tim Jesaitis, of the Law Offices of Tim Jesaitis, P.A., offered insightful testimony on the impact of proposed rule 69B: 220.201(3)(f) rule on workers’ compensation, citing the uniqueness of workers’ compensation and who might be considered "parties” to the contract or "clients”.

DFS officials seemed genuinely interested in the testimony offered, and on numerous occasions referenced the very obvious "passion” that these proposed changes have evoked across the claims community. The record for comment will close on August 12, 2010.

Unfortunately, it appears resolution of these issues will be further delayed as the Florida Association of Public Insurance Adjusters has filed an administrative challenge to the Department’s authority to make such rule changes. The hearing before a Florida Administrative Law Judge will be held August 25th, 2010.