In Yuval Lugassy and Susan Lugassy v. United Property & Casualty Insurance Company, No. 4D21-2929 (4th DCA November 23, 2022), the Fourth DCA reversed a trial court order dismissing a first-party bad faith action arising from the insured homeowners’ water damage claim. Following the initial adjustment of the claim, the homeowners disputed the amount of loss and provided the insurer with two repair estimates.

The homeowners filed a civil remedy notice (“CRN”) which identified general damages as “more than $50,000.”  Following an appraisal award in the homeowner’s favor, they proceeded with a  bad faith action. The trial court dismissed the complaint, ruling that the CRN inadequately specified the cure amount. The Fourth DCA disagreed, holding that the CRN complied with the specificity requirements of §624.155(3)(b), Fla. Stat.

The Fourth DCA recognized that a CRN does not need to specify an exact amount necessary to cure alleged violations.  Rather, the CRN was specific enough to place the insurer  on notice of the cure terms, as “’common sense’” dictates that it could have cured the alleged violations by increasing its offer in accordance with the homeowners’ two estimates. To see full opinion visit: here.