Consumers, public adjusters urge committee to ban insurance clauses that bar homeowners from hiring adjusters

Timely consumer stories and legal testimony filled a Joint Committee on Financial Services hearing as witnesses asked lawmakers to outlaw policy language that prevents homeowners from hiring licensed public insurance adjusters and to advance House 1100 and Senate 785.

Supporters said the endorsements, primarily appearing in surplus‑lines policies, strip consumers of a licensed option to pursue fair claim settlements after home losses. "This language means exactly what it says," said Tim Ball, president of the Massachusetts Association of Public Insurance Adjusters, describing endorsements that bar insureds from "hire[ing], engaging, retain[ing], contract[ing] with, or otherwise utilize[ing] the services of a PA." He said the endorsements conflict with Massachusetts licensing for public adjusters and effectively deny consumers a regulated advocate.

The bills matter because public adjusters, supporters said, can identify and document damages that homeowners and insurers sometimes miss and they are a regulated profession in most states. "Public adjusters are licensed in 46 of the 50 states," said Brian Goodman, general counsel to the National Association of Public Insurance Adjusters, arguing that Massachusetts should follow other states that have outlawed the anti‑PA endorsement. Goodman said surplus‑lines carriers are the primary source of the clauses and that similar statutes have been enacted elsewhere.

Multiple homeowners described large differences in settlement outcomes when they engaged public adjusters. Lila Warner said her insurer’s initial offer for a water loss was $3,600; after hiring a public adjuster the insurer’s second offer rose to $10,800, and an arbitration panel later awarded $88,500. Mary Anne Alvarez said a first water loss without a public adjuster resulted in a $27,000 payment; a later, nearly identical loss with a public adjuster led to a final settlement of $181,000. Tyler Lewis said a public adjuster identified more than $35,000 in additional missing personal‑property items and reminded him of a deadline to claim depreciation that otherwise would have cost him more than $90,000.

Supporters asked the committee to prohibit endorsements that strip insureds of the right to hire public adjusters and to report House 1100 and Senate 785 favorably. Opponents were not represented at length on this specific provision during the hearing; several witnesses from insurance trade groups testified on separate bills earlier in the session.

The committee did not take a formal vote on the bills at the hearing. Witnesses and consumers urged lawmakers to act to preserve the option for consumers to retain licensed public adjusters when negotiating complex property claims.