This 42 page decision Biscayne Cove Condominium Association, Inc. v. QBE Ins. Corp., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5194 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 14, 2013) makes for some very interesting reading. The case was one of those late blooming Hurricane Wilma condo claims that I suspect contributed to the thinking that a change in law regarding the time a policyholder has to file a claim might be a good idea. You can draw your own conclusions about what went on in this case (I know I have) but one of the clear take-aways is that in this case the Judge was not buying what was being sold.

As an aside, the 30% rule this public adjuster was relying on and thought existed drew some chuckles in a meeting our firm recently attended with a group of condo lawyers. Seriously, there are some very interesting points made in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. As the old saying goes; “it’s not my monkey and it’s not my circus” thankfully! 

Q. I have a friend that lives in a retirement condominium community. They have a condo policy that covers all 8 buildings in the community. The insurance has paid to replace between 98-160 shingles per roof due to hail damage. The HOA by-laws state that the roof color must be the same on all roofs. After 17 years it will not be possible to match that many shingles on each roof. They have ordinance and law coverage in their policy for replacement cost. Would this apply in this situation? Should the insurance have to pay for a full replacement of the shingle roofs?