Mediation First: The Evolving Florida Playbook for Property Insurance Disputes

Why mediation and arbitration are becoming the new normal in Florida—and how experts move cases to resolution

Florida’s property insurance disputes are increasingly resolved outside the courtroom. While the state doesn’t publish a single, public trendline showing year-over-year mediation volumes for property claims, a set of hard signals points in one direction: more disputes are being routed into mediation, neutral evaluation, appraisal, and arbitration—well before trial.

Statutory expansion of the state’s mediation program, an active court-connected ADR infrastructure, and declining litigation filings after recent reforms all push parties toward ADR forums.

The Florida signals that ADR is ascendant

1. Florida’s DFS property-claim mediation is broad—and now expressly open to court-referred litigants.
   Section 627.7015, Florida Statutes creates a DFS-administered property insurance mediation program. Importantly, the statute makes this mediation “available to litigants referred to the department by a county court or circuit court,” expanding the intake beyond consumer-initiated requests. In 2023, the Legislature further clarified access and program mechanics (CS/CS/HB 487), reinforcing the pathway for more disputes to enter mediation.
2. The mediation pipeline is easy to access—for both insureds and insurers.
   Florida’s DFS outlines simple procedures: first-party and third-party claimants may request mediation, and insurers may request it too. In practice, that means both sides have a low-friction on-ramp into ADR once a claim decision is made or reconsidered.
3. Courts in Florida are structurally set up to favor ADR.
   Florida’s state courts emphasize ADR through the Dispute Resolution Center, Supreme Court rules for certified mediators, and ongoing updates to mediator qualifications and operating procedures (revised in 2024–2025). The judiciary also maintains a Uniform Data Reporting (UDR) system for trial court statistics—evidence of institutional tracking that supports court-connected ADR management and capacity.
4. Litigation is falling—freeing oxygen for ADR to resolve disputes.
   Property and personal-lines litigation in Florida has declined materially since the 2022–2023 reforms (e.g., ending one-way fees). OIR-cited figures show ~25% fewer personal insurance lawsuits in H1 2025 vs. H1 2024, and national coverage has consistently tied lower filings to Florida’s reforms. Fewer suits + court referral authority + a mature DFS program = more disputes funneled into ADR before trial.
5. The broader ADR market is growing (a useful benchmark).
   Outside Florida, leading providers report rising caseloads a directional confirmation that ADR usage is expanding generally.

Bottom line: Florida’s statutes, court framework, and market behavior together suggest ADR’s incident rate is rising—even if the state doesn’t publish a neat “mediation count by year” series for property claims.

When ADR makes the most sense in property claims

Mediation

• Great fit: when coverage is mostly resolved and the fight is about scope, pricing, or timelines.
• Value: flexible resolutions (partial settlements, structured payouts, remediation schedules), confidentiality, and faster cash-flow relief.
• Florida fit: easy entry once a claim decision is made; courts can refer cases directly.

Arbitration

• Best: where policy language mandates it or both parties want a binding, streamlined process.
• Value: faster than trial, fewer discovery disputes, arbitrator(s) with technical fluency.

Appraisal / Neutral Evaluation (hybrids)

• Use: to narrow valuation disputes or technical causation issues; pair with mediation to close the gap on remaining terms.
• Florida fit: DFS also supports neutral evaluation (e.g., sinkhole) as part of the toolkit.

Pitfalls that derail ADR—and how to avoid them

1. Thin documentation

• Problem: Arriving at mediation with partial estimates, missing logs, or muddled causation narratives.
• Fix: Organize a clean packet: chronology, communications log, field data, photos, expert estimates, and variance analysis.

2. No linkage between delay and damages

• Problem: Arguing “unreasonable delay” without quantifying consequential deterioration (mold spread, business-interruption, ALE).
• Fix: Tie timeline milestones to loss progression and cost deltas (before/after).

3. Over-reliance on rhetoric

• Problem: “We think the carrier was unfair.” Arbitrators/mediators need standards, not just stories.
• Fix: Anchor positions to industry norms (IICRC standards, customary carrier workflows, Florida prompt-pay expectations).

4. Ignoring process optics

• Problem: Sloppy or argumentative presentation undercuts credibility.
• Fix: Treat ADR like court: neutral tone, clean exhibits, disciplined experts, and a precise ask.

Why expert analysis changes outcomes in ADR

In mediation

• Reality-tests numbers: A neutral damage model (scope, unit costs, code upgrades, time-element impacts) gives mediators leverage to move parties.
• Clarifies causation: Separates storm-related damage from pre-existing conditions or maintenance—key for carrier exposure and for plaintiff leverage.
• Translates process: Explains claims-handling norms so negotiation focuses on facts, not frustrations.

In arbitration (or court-connected ADR)

• Builds the record: Expert reports, methodologies, and exhibits meet expectations under Florida’s mediator/court standards and give decision-makers confidence.
• Benchmarks conduct: Compares carrier timelines and communications to reasonable industry practice (helpful both for plaintiffs and defense).

A practical checklist you can use tomorrow

• Pre-ADR file audit (10–14 days out): Confirm coverage posture, scope deltas, open RFIs, and pay history.
• Evidence pack: Side-by-side estimate variances, timeline charts (FNOL → inspections → decisions), causation summary, and photos annotated to line items.
• Damages model: One reconciled number with ranges (best/target/floor) and structured settlement options (e.g., staged repairs).
• ADR brief: 3–5 pages, neutral tone, sources cited; attach exhibits.
• Expert alignment: One voice for causation, one for valuation; decide who will speak vs. who will be on call.

The All Claims Consulting edge

We’re built for Florida property claims. Our experts bring courtroom-ready, neutral analysis that plays well in mediation and arbitration: clear opinions, reconciled valuation models, and timelines that connect conduct to impact. That’s how we help attorneys—on both sides—move disputes to resolution.

Need a case moved into ADR? We can help audit the file, assist with preparing the evidence pack, and sit second-chair at the session to help you land the number that sticks.

Contact us or more insights or to discuss how All Claims Consulting can support your next case.