“Pissing In The Wind” Comment Disqualifies Appraiser From Appraisal Panel

How can an appraiser selected for an appraisal panel become disqualified based on bias? One way appears to be by writing the following to the opposing appraiser in an email:

The attorney is pissing in the wind if he thinks this case is any different than the one indicated below. Same carrier (HOA) and same endorsement language. They won’t get a dime more that [sic] what HOA has already paid, regardless of any ‘appraisal award.’

Just going to spend a lot of money and waste a lot of time without any different results.

After reviewing the briefs and arguments of the parties, the trial court then disqualified Kevin Hromas as an appraiser, finding:

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiff Kyle J. McPike’s Motion to Disqualify is hereby in all things GRANTED. The Court specifically finds that Appraiser Kevin Hromas is DISQUALIFIED from acting as an appraiser in this case. The Court further finds Kevin Hromas is biased against Plaintiff, and its representatives, that Kevin Hromas acted in a biased and unfair manner, in violation of the policy. Based on Kevin Hromas’s bias and based on his unfair and bad faith approach to the appraisal, Mr. Hromas is not a qualified appraiser.1

Kevin Hromas is a well known insurance appraiser always being selected by insurance companies. He previously was a central character of this blog in Insurance Company Representative Says Merlin Law Group Las Vegas Seminar Worth $10,000. In that post, I noted:

According to Kevin Hromas, I am the most valuable educator of first party property insurance claims in the world. Hromas is an insurance company appraiser and adjuster. A couple months ago, I got a number of text messages indicating that he was saying all kinds of negative, and even defamatory, things about me and our firm during a speech in Oklahoma City. I did not think much about it because others told me that few people paid attention to him. But we noticed that he signed up for a public adjuster seminar we are hosting in Las Vegas.

…

Kevin Hromas and his two-person firm is not a major player in the insurance claims adjusting industry. His obvious bias against policyholders and his crazy ‘Chip Merlin is going to pay me $10,000 or I am going to show up and force myself into his seminar’ establishes that at least one insurance company adjuster assumes that policyholders who suffer losses and their representatives should be viewed as suspected frauds. Why would I or any insurance company want this man or those of the same persuasion at a seminar or want to work with him in resolving an insurance claim? Policyholders need honest, empathetic, and motivated professionals to fully and promptly pay the entire amount owed, not derogatory zealots who assume policyholders and their representatives are crooks.

The Texas judge seemed to come to a similar conclusion.

There are a couple of important lessons for appraisers and umpires to consider from this case.

First, policyholders and insurance companies deserve honest, empathetic, and qualified professionals free of bias. Panelists with an agenda to control claims severity or make a windfall are not qualified to be part of the appraisal process.

Second, professionalism requires respect for the other side. It should be shown in the communications between members of the panel.

This case came to my attention by reading Steve Badger’s LinkedIn post. Badger has a lot of great information about current issues in the property insurance arena to consider, even if you do not agree with him.

Next week, Badger and I will debate at an Insurance Appraisal and Umpire Association (IAUA) seminar at the Streamsong Resort. I am certain this case will come up for discussion. Here is the link for the registration.

Finally, the briefs by the attorneys for the policyholder and insurance company were excellent. I attach them for your review.

Thought For The Day       

We don’t need to share the same opinions as others, but we need to be respectful.

—Taylor Swift

_______________________

1 McPike v. Homeowners of America Ins. Co., No. 2021-70308 (Tex. Dist. Ct. Oct. 20, 2023).