In mid-October, the Wisconsin Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (OCI) announced a final decision and $6,000 fine against a contractor found to be acting as a public adjuster without proper licensing under Wis. Stat. § 629.10(3)
The contractor’s business model—combining repair services with “claim assistance” through assignment of benefits—was ruled a violation of consumer-protection law.
This may seem like an isolated enforcement action, but for contractors in neighboring Ohio, it’s a flashing red warning light. The same practices are now drawing attention in Columbus, Cleveland, and Cincinnati as regulators, insurers, and even courts take a closer look at where “helping a client with their claim” crosses the line into Unauthorized Practice of Public Adjusting (UPPA).
The Line Between Helping and Violating the Law
Ohio contractors routinely meet with adjusters, prepare estimates, and explain damage scope to policyholders. Those actions, when limited to construction matters, are lawful and necessary.
But the Wisconsin case demonstrates how easy it is to step over the line—for example, by:
- Communicating with the insurer about coverage disputes or payment on behalf of the insured.
- Preparing or presenting claim documentation not tied directly to your repair contract.
- Offering “claim management” or “insurance negotiation” as part of your service package.
In Wisconsin, those actions subjected the contractor to public adjuster licensing standards and penalties. In Ohio, those same acts could lead to referral to the Department of Insurance or even civil action for deceptive practices under Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act.
Why the Cinnamon Ridge v. State Farm Case Matters
Adding to the complexity, the federal case Cinnamon Ridge Condominium Association, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (S.D. Ohio 2024) has further blurred the boundaries between construction and insurance adjusting.
In that decision, the court embraced the “line of sight” rule—requiring insurers to replace all materials within a continuous visible line when matching undamaged property to repaired sections.
Contractors interpreting that ruling as a green light to negotiate for “matching” coverage with carriers are taking a dangerous risk. Unless you are a licensed public adjuster, arguing policy interpretation or advocating coverage positions—even when accurate—can be construed as UPPA.
Why Ohio Contractors Should Care Now
The Wisconsin enforcement sends a message: conduct, not job title, determines whether you’re acting as a public adjuster.
Ohio regulators can easily follow suit, particularly since multi-state carriers already apply uniform compliance expectations across regions.
With ongoing legislative interest in tightening consumer-protection rules—and with Cinnamon Ridge reinforcing the insurer’s contractual limits—Ohio’s construction and restoration community is approaching checkmate territory.
How Contractors Can Protect Their Business
- Draw a Bright Line – Make sure all communications with carriers relate strictly to your repair scope, not policy interpretation or settlement values.
- Separate Services – Do not include “claim assistance,” “insurance recovery,” or “negotiation support” in your marketing, contracts, or proposals.
- Partner Legally – If your clients need representation, refer them to a licensed public adjuster—without accepting or offering referral payments.
- Train Your Teams – Educate estimators and sales staff about what constitutes UPPA and how to stay compliant.
- Stay Informed – Monitor regulatory updates from the Ohio Department of Insurance and industry associations like the Heartland Association of Public Insurance Adjusters (HAPIA).
Beyond Facebook: Building Real Awareness
Contractors tell us they’ve seen the posts—but not the impact. Compliance education needs to go deeper than social media headlines.
Ohio trade groups, roofing associations, and restoration networks should host joint sessions with public adjusters and attorneys to demystify what’s legal and what isn’t. Regulatory agencies are no longer treating these issues as “gray areas”—and ignorance will not be a defense when enforcement begins.
Final Thought: Checkmate Is Closer Than You Think
In chess, missing a single developing move can end the game before you realize it. The Wisconsin enforcement and Ohio’s Cinnamon Ridge ruling are those quiet, calculated moves. If contractors continue to overlook compliance, the next decisive action might not come from Madison—it may come from Columbus.
Disclaimer
The information contained in this blog post is for general educational and informational purposes only.
Employees of Green Public Insurance Adjusting are not attorneys and do not provide legal advice.
Readers should not interpret this article as legal guidance or a substitute for consulting a qualified attorney regarding specific compliance or business matters.
