SB 1716 amends Florida law governing Citizens Property Insurance Corporation’s handling of claim disputes. The bill deletes the existing statutory authorization that allows Citizens to include in its policies an alternative dispute resolution process for claim determinations before the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH), including disputes over coverage, scope, and value of claims. As drafted, the bill removes the detailed procedural framework that currently treats those proceedings similarly to court actions for purposes of attorney-fee and offer-of-judgment provisions.
The bill also removes the related authority for Citizens to contract with DOAH to conduct such dispute-resolution proceedings under policy terms, and it repeals that contracting provision on July 1, 2026. If enacted, the measure would narrow or eliminate the statutory basis for Citizens-specific administrative dispute resolution of claims and would leave affected disputes to be handled under other applicable law or policy provisions, rather than under the special DOAH process described in current statute.
Impact
The bill would amend section 627.351, Florida Statutes, which governs Citizens Property Insurance Corporation and insurance risk apportionment plans. Its main legal effect is to strike the statutory language authorizing Citizens to resolve claim disputes through DOAH and to remove the associated references to attorney-fee sanctions, offer-of-judgment procedures, and the statement that such proceedings are not chapter 120 administrative proceedings. This would reduce Citizens’ ability to use a specialized administrative forum for claim-determination disputes and could shift those disputes into other dispute-resolution channels or ordinary litigation, depending on policy language and other applicable statutes.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment cannot be measured from discussion history. The bill’s structure suggests a targeted policy change rather than a broad reform, and its sponsor appears to be seeking to repeal a specific Citizens dispute-resolution mechanism. Because no committee transcripts or vote tallies are available, there is no documented support or opposition in the supplied record.
Contention
The likely point of contention is whether Citizens Property Insurance Corporation should continue to have a special administrative process for resolving claim disputes before DOAH. Supporters of repeal may view the current process as unnecessary, overly favorable to one side, or inconsistent with standard judicial procedures. Opponents may argue that the existing framework provides a faster, more specialized, and potentially less costly way to resolve coverage and valuation disputes for policyholders and the corporation. The bill also implicates attorney-fee exposure and offer-of-judgment rules, which are often contentious because they can materially affect litigation strategy and settlement leverage.