| 
Big I New York has joined a diverse coalition of business and industry groups in calling on State Lawmakers to oppose the “Fostering Affordability and Integrity through Reasonable (FAIR) Business Practices Act." The so-called FAIR Act would upend existing consumer protection law by dramatically expanding the instances in which lawsuits can be filed for “unfair" and “deceptive" acts and practices. The bill has the support of State Attorney General Letitia James who just last week was joined by bill sponsors State Senator Leroy Comrie and Assemblymember Micah Lasher at a rally to push the bill over the finish line before lawmakers leave Albany on June 12. “While we support protecting consumers and holding bad actors accountable, this bill would significantly expand the risk of profit-driven contingency fee law firms filing speculative lawsuits to coerce settlements," stated the coalition letter to lawmakers. “If this bill were to pass, it would be deeply harmful to the state's business climate and the integrity of the civil justice system." The full letter can be found here. Grassroots advocacy opposing the bill is possible in the coming weeks.
|
|
 Big I New York meeting with Rep. Nick Langworthy in Washington, D.C. to discuss the impact of Labor Law 240/241 on the New York insurance marketplace. (from left, Ashley Engl, Travis Wattie, Doug Benz, Rep. Langworthy, Patrick Erickson, Lisa Hussainov, Kristin McNally, and Kate Sellers. Big I New York's efforts to spur congressional action on the state's “scaffold law" bore fruit this week when Congressman Nick Langworthy (NY-23) introduced the Infrastructure Expansion Act ( H.R. 3548) in the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill would modify the law's effects on construction projects receiving federal funding. Big I New York has for many years urged state lawmakers to act on the law. However, we have also worked closely with members of the U.S. Congress to pursue legislation that would help address the considerable market challenges presented by this outdated law. Rep. Langworthy's bill would permit owners and contractors to raise a worker's comparative negligence as a defense against a lawsuit over an injury. This ability would apply to claims involving gravity-related injuries on projects receiving federal financial assistance, whether directly or indirectly. Rep. Langworthy's official announcement featured Big I New York's support: “New York's outdated labor law is a drag on economic progress and a hidden tax on every resident and business in the state," said Kelly Gonyo, Chair of the Board, Big I New York. “Nowhere is the damage more visible than in the insurance market, where the so-called 'Scaffold Law' has made general liability coverage increasingly unaffordable—and in some cases, completely unavailable. Ask any insurance agent, and they'll tell you about small contractors walking away from work they can't insure, taxpayers footing the bill for skyrocketing public project costs, and affordable housing providers forced to delay critical safety upgrades just to afford their premiums. This law is not only outdated—it's actively harming communities across New York. We applaud Representative Langworthy for taking a bold stand on this issue and leading the charge for common-sense reform. Fixing this broken statute is essential to restoring fairness, affordability, and functionality to New York's insurance marketplace." This effort was a top priority for attendees of the Big “I" Legislative Conference in Washington, D.C. last month, which included a meeting with Rep. Langworthy. Then-Congressman John Faso introduced the original version of the bill in 2017. Big I New York is committed to building support for H.R. 3548. This may include a grassroots advocacy campaign in the months ahead. More about the Scaffold Law: The scaffold law – New York Labor Law Sections 240(1) and 241(6) – imposes “strict liability" for worker injuries on construction project owners, contractors, and those with authority to act on their behalf. This means that courts automatically hold these parties liable for injuries that arise even indirectly from violations of those sections of the law. These parties have few defenses in court, even where the worker may have contributed to the injury. The laws date back to the 19th century. More than a century ago, the state legislature amended them to prevent defendants from raising the injured worker's own negligence as a factor in determining who was liable for the accident. New York's highest court ruled almost 80 years ago that defendants could not cite the worker's contribution to the accident. Subsequent decisions have permitted defendants to escape liability only where the worker's actions were the sole immediate cause of the accident. Liability insurance carriers have paid large damage awards and settlements under these laws. This has made liability coverage for construction contractors increasingly difficult to obtain and extremely expensive. In fact, the New York State Department of Financial Services permits excess line brokers to obtain this coverage from non-admitted insurers without having to obtain the standard three declinations from admitted carriers. State taxpayers end up bearing those costs for large public projects such as the replacement of the old Tappan Zee Bridge from 2012 to 2018. The insurance industry, property owners, and contractors' groups have long called for repeal or reform of the scaffold law. More information about this law is available from the Scaffold Law page in the Answer Center of our website. |
| Independent insurance agents across New York and Connecticut have always been the heart of their communities - volunteering their time, supporting local initiatives, and stepping up in moments of need. Now, you have an opportunity to take that impact even further by nominating a nonprofit for the 2025 Insurance Industry Charitable Foundation (IICF) Local Grant Program. The IICF Northeast Division is offering grants of at least $2,500 to deserving 501(c)(3) public charities that serve communities in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut. As an agent, you can be the sponsoring insurance entity that helps a nonprofit in your area secure much-needed funding to expand their impact. This is your chance to uplift a cause that matters to you—whether it's food insecurity, youth services, homelessness, or another vital issue facing your community. Key Details:Application Deadline: Friday, June 27, 2025, by 5:00 PM Grant Awards: Announced in Q3 2025 Eligibility: Nonprofits must be 501(c)(3) public charities serving NY, NJ, or CT. An insurance industry sponsor is required for each application.
Application Submission: Must be sent electronically to Rachel Boulton at rboulton@iicf.orgThe process is simple: Reach out to a local nonprofit you support, share the application and guidelines, and let them know you're proud to be their sponsor. Together, we can make a difference. Let's continue the tradition of service and leadership. Nominate a charity that reflects your values and helps make your neighborhood a better place. For more information or to access the application materials, feel free to contact Rachel Boulton at 732-693-0889 or rboulton@iicf.org.
|
| 
The New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) has formally proposed an amended regulation on hurricane deductible triggers. The department is accepting comments from the public until July 7. The regulation will implement a law enacted last year. That law, which Big I New York supported, requires the department to “by regulation establish standards for hurricane windstorm deductibles, which create, to the greatest extent possible, uniformity in the operation of such deductibles with respect to the triggering event." The law was intended to respond to concerns that homeowners in the same town or village might face vastly different hurricane deductibles because of the difference in policy conditions regarding what triggers them. The DFS proposal will make these requirements: - Carriers will have to provide insureds notices about hurricane deductibles at policy issuance and renewal. The notices will be subject to DFS approval. The proposed text provides standards for the notices to meet. Carriers will be able to combine this notice with the mandatory flood insurance notice if they wish.
- Carriers will have to demonstrate to DFS that there is sufficient exposure to hurricane risk in that geographic area before a policy could contain a hurricane deductible.
- The deductible may be triggered only when the National Weather Service (NWS) has determined that a hurricane made landfall ("the intersection of the surface center of a tropical cyclone with a coastline") in New York.
- The deductible will apply to direct damage caused by winds from twelve hours before landfall until twelve hours after NWS cancels the last hurricane warning or watch for New York for a specific hurricane.
- Carriers will be able to vary deductibles by county, a property's proximity to the coastline ("distance measured from mean high water"), or both.
- Carriers will have to aggregate all covered losses (dwelling, other structures, and personal property) when determining whether the loss exceeds the hurricane deductible.
- If multiple deductibles apply, the carrier will be able to apply only one, and that can be the highest one.
- Carriers will not be permitted to apply hurricane deductible to loss of use coverage.
- The requirements will take effect 180 days after the department formally adopts them and will apply to homeowners and dwelling policies issued or renewed on or after that date. For example, if the department publishes the notice of adoption in the July 16, 2025 issue of New York State Register, the requirements will apply to policies issued or renewed on and after January 12, 2026.
Big I New York intends to submit comments to the department before the July 7 deadline. Anyone else wishing to do so should send them to joana.lucashuk@dfs.ny.gov by that date.
|
| 
It will be easier for victims of dog bites to hold pet owners liable thanks to a ruling last month from New York's highest court. The Court of Appeals unanimously overturned previous rulings holding dog owners to a “strict liability" standard, meaning that the owner had no defense against a lawsuit only if they had “actual or constructive knowledge of their animal's vicious propensities." The case involved a postal worker bitten in 2018 by a 70-pound dog while delivering a package at a home. She heard a dog barking when she parked her truck in the driveway. After waiting to see if the dog was outside and finding that it wasn't, she exited the truck. The post office had not warned her of the presence of a dangerous dog at the home and no warning signs were displayed. The homeowner greeted her at the door to accept the package, whereupon his dog slipped past him through the open door and lunged at the postal carrier's neck. As the owner called his name, the carrier shielded her face and neck with a hand and the dog bit her shoulder, breaking skin. As soon as the owner got the dog away from her, she quickly returned to the truck without looking back. She had suffered a torn shoulder muscle, requiring multiple surgeries and leaving her with permanent scars. The owners testified that their dog had a history of being boisterous but not aggressive. Other postal workers who'd delivered there testified that the dog practically tried to jump through windows at them. Despite that, lower courts dismissed her claim against the homeowners, saying that they had no actual or constructive knowledge of the dog having a vicious propensity, and thus they could not be held strictly liable. She then appealed to the Court of Appeals, asking them to overrule prior decisions holding that pet owners are not liable for ordinary negligence. Writing for the court, Judge Caitlin J. Halligan said that, while they will overrule a prior decision “in the rarest of case," “… rarely does not mean never." She wrote that the rule requiring knowledge of vicious propensities had been eroded by a patchwork of later decisions. She also described the question as one of fairness: “(W)hy should someone harmed by a domestic animal bear the risk—and the cost—of injury, provided that the animal's owner did not know or have reason to know of a vicious propensity?" The answer, a unanimous court said, was that they should not bear that risk. They overruled the prior decision and held that ordinary rules of negligence apply to pet owners. This ruling means that it will be easier for dog bite victims to win lawsuits against dog owners. An increase in lawsuits over these injuries appears to be a likely consequence. Insurers paid $1.57 billion for dog bite claims in 2024, according to the Insurance Information Institute. In New York at least, that number is likely to grow. While it is illegal for insurers to exclude coverage for bodily injury liability under Homeowners policies based solely on a dog's breed, this decision may influence the availability of Homeowners insurance. That type of insurance has become increasingly less available over the last few years. This decision is unlikely to improve the situation. Big I NY members may want to inform their clients who own dogs about this decision and the implications for their own potential liability. With liability insurance, more is always better, so this is also a good time to discuss the need for higher limits and personal umbrella policies. Dogs can be our best companions, but they come with risks. You can help your clients navigate those risks.
|
| 
Big I New York's bill to create a single insurance producer's license has been introduced in the New York State Assembly. Assemblymember Pamela J. Hunter (D – 128th District) introduced Assembly Bill 8065 in that chamber on April 22, 2025. The bill would replace separate licenses for insurance agents and brokers with a single producer's license. Separate licenses for the life/health and property/casualty lines of authority would continue to exist. The bill would conform New York's licensing system with those in most other states. It would also end confusion over whether an individual should hold an agent's license, a broker's license, or both. Big I New York members often report that insurance carriers require licensed employees to hold agents' licenses. In many cases, a broker's license is more appropriate for that individual. The bill awaits consideration by the Assembly Insurance Committee. We are working to secure a sponsor for the bill in the Senate.
|
|  Capitol Hill was buzzing last week with hundreds of independent insurance agents who traveled to Washington, D.C. for the 2025 Big “I" Legislative Conference. Big I New York and Connecticut were well-represented with 34 members, plus staff, in attendance. Armed with legislative priorities and personal experiences, attendees shared compelling arguments with lawmakers and staff from nearly every New York and Connecticut Congressional office. Legal system reform was top of mind as members shared how unregulated third-party litigation financing (TPLF) puts upward pressure on rates in an already challenging marketplace. The Litigation Transparency Act would require the disclosure of TPLF agreements in civil actions to protect plaintiffs from investors taking an outsized share of the recovery. ( Don't miss the upcoming TPLF webinar to learn more!) Members also advocated for legislation that would prohibit the use of absolute liability for gravity related job site injuries for projects with federal funding. This federal approach to address New York's labor law 240/241 would help address the limited availability and cost of general liability insurance for New York projects by requiring a comparative negligence standard. Connecticut members also advocated for this bill as many CT-based restoration and construction businesses serving New York face the same insurance challenges. With approximately $6 saved for every $1 invested into disaster mitigation, members advocated for legislation that would incentivize property owners to invest in hardening infrastructure to protect against natural disaster. They also urged Congress to pass a long-term reauthorization of the National Flood insurance Program (NFIP). Tax reform was also high on the radar with the expiration of much of the 2017 Tax Cuts & Jobs Act. Members shared the importance of reauthorizing the 20% small business deduction for pass-through entities and emphasized how tax incentives allow them to invest back into their communities through job creation and philanthropic initiatives. The meetings wrapped up with a request to oppose legislative or regulatory efforts to reduce the Federal Crop Insurance Program (FCIP). The Big I team is deeply grateful for the incredible work done by attendees and looks forward to seeing new and returning members at the 2026 Big “I" Legislative Conference on April 22-24. |
Follow javascript: SP.SOD.executeFunc('followingcommon.js', 'FollowDoc', function() { FollowDoc('{ListId}', {ItemId}); }); 0x0 0x0 ContentType 0x01 1100 Item Audit Detail /_layouts/15/images/GORTL.GIF /newsfeed/_layouts/15/AuditingLog/ItemAudit.aspx?ItemId={ItemId}&ListId={ListId} 0x0 0x40000000 ContentType 0x01 300 Compliance Details javascript:if (typeof CalloutManager !== 'undefined' && Boolean(CalloutManager) && Boolean(CalloutManager.closeAll)) CalloutManager.closeAll(); commonShowModalDialog('{SiteUrl}'+
'/_layouts/15/itemexpiration.aspx'
+'?ID={ItemId}&List={ListId}', 'center:1;dialogHeight:500px;dialogWidth:500px;resizable:yes;status:no;location:no;menubar:no;help:no', function GotoPageAfterClose(pageid){if(pageid == 'hold') {STSNavigate(unescape(decodeURI('{SiteUrl}'))+
'/_layouts/15/hold.aspx'
+'?ID={ItemId}&List={ListId}'); return false;} if(pageid == 'audit') {STSNavigate(unescape(decodeURI('{SiteUrl}'))+
'/_layouts/15/Reporting.aspx'
+'?Category=Auditing&backtype=item&ID={ItemId}&List={ListId}'); return false;} if(pageid == 'config') {STSNavigate(unescape(decodeURI('{SiteUrl}'))+
'/_layouts/15/expirationconfig.aspx'
+'?ID={ItemId}&List={ListId}'); return false;}}, null); 0x0 0x1 ContentType 0x01 898
|
|
|