Trust Accounting practices

When Settlement Funds Fall Through the Cracks: Protecting Clients and Your Business

Settlement funds can become compromised when law firms dispute control, delay distribution, or mishandle trust account obligations. Returned checks, uncashed payments, or prolonged disputes place clients at risk—especially when those funds are needed for urgent repairs or recovery work.

To protect client interests, professionals should maintain thorough documentation, verify when and how settlement funds were issued, and communicate proactively with insurers and counsel. Depending on the circumstances, it may be appropriate to request reissued payments, clarify fiduciary responsibilities, or seek guidance from regulatory bodies.

Above all, the focus should remain on ensuring the client receives their funds promptly and safely so they can move forward with necessary repairs and claim resolution.

Read More »

How Much of “You” Is Beneficial in Your Business?

Small business owners naturally shape their companies through their personalities, habits, and values — but those same traits can either propel or limit growth. When confidence turns into control, or financial caution becomes underinvestment, personal patterns start to show up in operations, finances, and relationships.

To stay balanced, owners should regularly assess how their behaviors affect people, process, and profit; seek honest accountability; and separate their personal identity from the company’s systems and reputation. The goal isn’t to remove yourself from your business, but to ensure it reflects the best parts of you — not the parts that hold it back.

Read More »

All’s Fair in Business and Collections

When service professionals complete their work but payment is delayed or withheld, fairness and financial stability are jeopardized. Public adjusters, like many licensed professionals, face unique restrictions that often prevent adding collection fees to unpaid accounts — yet they still must recover what is owed without violating regulatory boundaries.

To prevent disputes, contracts should clearly define when payment is due, how it may be processed, and what remedies exist for nonpayment. Keeping detailed records of all communications and transactions strengthens the ability to prove entitlement if funds are misdirected or delayed.

If recovery becomes necessary, professionals should pursue lawful options such as written demand notices, small claims actions, or using licensed collection agencies where permitted. Strengthening future relationships through transparent agreements, direct payment methods, and compliance reviews helps avoid similar issues.

Ultimately, ensuring fair payment practices is both a matter of legal compliance and professional integrity — protecting the value of services rendered and the trust between all parties involved.

Read More »

Walking the Line: Staying Neutral When Ego Enters the Room

When two parties clash over ego or personality differences, resolving the issue often becomes less about facts and more about feelings. Professionals caught in the middle must balance empathy with objectivity — listening to both sides without being drawn into personal loyalties or emotional narratives.

Maintaining neutrality requires a focus on documentation, process, and shared objectives rather than assigning fault. Clear communication, factual summaries, and forward-looking language help redirect energy toward productive solutions. Setting healthy boundaries and avoiding private alliances preserve credibility and prevent further escalation.

Ultimately, successful conflict resolution relies on professionalism, transparency, and emotional discipline — guiding all sides toward mutual respect and a common outcome, even when egos are at their loudest.

Read More »

Contractors in Ohio: The Wisconsin Warning You Can’t Ignore

Wisconsin’s recent enforcement action against a contractor for violating Wis. Stat. § 629.10(3) highlights growing regulatory scrutiny over contractors who engage in the Unauthorized Practice of Public Adjusting (UPPA). The contractor was fined for combining repair services with “claim assistance,” a violation of consumer protection laws.

For contractors in Ohio, this serves as a critical warning. The same activities—negotiating insurance settlements, interpreting policy coverage, or marketing claim management services—can expose businesses to significant penalties under Ohio law. The issue is further complicated by the Cinnamon Ridge v. State Farm decision, which adopted the “line of sight” rule for determining material replacement boundaries. That ruling expands repair obligations but also increases the temptation for contractors to discuss claim scope or coverage—conversations reserved for licensed public adjusters.

To remain compliant, contractors should focus strictly on construction and restoration activities, ensure their contracts exclude claim negotiation, train staff to recognize legal boundaries, and refer insurance-related matters to licensed public adjusters. Collaboration and education within the industry are essential to prevent future enforcement actions and to protect both consumers and legitimate contractors from costly missteps.

Read More »

Proposed Pennsylvania Legislation Threatens Homeowner Recovery Rights

Pennsylvania’s proposed House Bill 1972 and its companion Senate Bill could drastically limit the ability of public adjusters to help homeowners and small business owners recover after property losses.

The bills would cap public adjusting fees at 15% on all claims and just 10% on catastrophe claims, impose a 15-business-day right of rescission, and ban adjusters from owning or receiving payment from construction or restoration companies. They also double bonding requirements and forbid any financial relationships or referrals between contractors and adjusters.

Supporters state the bills protect consumers, but in practice they would force many small adjusting firms out of business, leaving some policyholders without independent representation during the claims process. Without public adjusters, many insureds would face underpayment or delays, with little recourse other than costly litigation.

The legislation could represent a significant shift of power toward insurance companies, undermining consumer rights and professional advocacy in claim recovery. Public adjusters, homeowners, and small business owners are encouraged to contact their legislators and oppose these bills to preserve access to fair claim representation in Pennsylvania.

Read More »
Balancing fair practices when handling insurance claims

When “Too Late” Isn’t Fair: Allstate’s Holdback Refusals and Ohio’s 60-Day Notice Rule

Allstate and other insurers are increasingly denying replacement cost benefits by citing a 180-day deadline found in their “How We Pay for a Loss” and “Building Structure Reimbursement” provisions. Policyholders who complete repairs and request payment afterward are sometimes told their claim is “untimely” — even when no prior warning was given. Under Ohio Administrative Code 3901-1-54(G)(5), insurers must provide written notice at least 60 days before any contractual limitation expires if the claimant is not represented by counsel. Failure to do so can invalidate the carrier’s reliance on the 180-day rule. This article explains the legal duty to notify, outlines defenses against untimely denial, and offers best practices for public adjusters and policyholders to protect recovery rights when carriers fail to communicate looming deadlines.

Read More »

When One Storm Becomes Three Claims: Understanding Causation and Policyholder Remedies

When a single event, such as a lightning strike, causes multiple types of damage, some adjusters may insist the policyholder file separate claims for each resulting loss. In most cases, however, these damages should be treated as one claim arising from a single occurrence. This article explains how improper “claim splitting” can cost policyholders multiple deductibles, delay payment, and distort their claim history. It also outlines steps Ohio policyholders can take to challenge such determinations, including filing a complaint with the Ohio Department of Insurance under Administrative Code 3901-1-54, engaging a licensed public adjuster, and preserving their rights under bad faith protections.

Read More »

Independent Collaboration in Public Adjusting: Legality, Liability, and Control

Independent public adjusters often collaborate to manage complex claims or bridge slow market periods—but questions about legality, liability, and control can make those partnerships tricky. This article explains when collaboration is permissible, how liability is assigned when working under another firm’s license, and what distinguishes an independent contractor from a statutory employee. With clear agreements, proper licensing, and respect for professional boundaries, collaboration between adjusters can be both compliant and mutually beneficial.

Read More »

The Leadership Dilemma: When Public Adjusters Step Away from the Field

As public adjusting firms grow, many owners step back from hands-on claim handling to focus on leadership and business strategy. While this transition allows for stronger operations, staff development, and long-term stability, it can also create distance from market trends, field realities, and the technical skills that built their credibility. This article explores the balance between managing a business and maintaining professional relevance — offering insight into how firm owners can stay connected to the claims process while guiding their teams toward growth.

Read More »
Satellite office in KY

Green Public

Insurance Adjusting

Is now in Kentucky serving clients affected by the tornados. Stop by our satellite location at 3205 US Highway 641 N in Benton, KY. We’re just down the road from the Kentucky Opry.