The 2025 Los Angeles wildfires have left many businesses and individuals in Southern California facing significant challenges. In part 2 of a podcast focused on insurance claims following a natural disaster, we hope to assist victims as they navigate the insurance claims process. In this podcast, John Ellison, Chris Kuleba, Max Louik and Esther Kim discuss claim submissions, the post-loss insurance policy conditions that policyholders need to comply with and the coverages that are...
The 2025 Los Angeles wildfires have left many businesses and individuals in Southern California facing significant challenges. In part 2 of a podcast focused on insurance claims following a natural disaster, we hope to assist victims as they navigate the insurance claims process. In this podcast, John Ellison, Chris Kuleba, Max Louik and Esther Kim discuss claim submissions, the post-loss insurance policy conditions that policyholders need to comply with and the coverages that are available for losses resulting from a natural disaster under a first-party property policy.
----more----
Transcript:
Intro: Hello, and welcome to Insured Success, a podcast brought to you by Reed Smith's insurance recovery lawyers from around the globe. In this podcast series, we explore trends, issues, and topics of interest affecting commercial policyholders. If you have any questions about the topics discussed in this podcast, please contact our speakers at insuredsuccess@reedsmith.com. We'll be happy to assist.
John: Greetings and welcome back to the latest episode of Insured Success. Today's topic is part two of our podcast on dealing with natural disaster claims. We're focusing on three topics related to natural disaster claims for business owners and also individuals. Part one, we'll talk about claim submission. Part two will be the post-loss insurance policy conditions that policyholders need to comply with. And part three is the various coverages that are available for losses resulting from a natural disaster under a first-party property policy. My name is John Ellison. I'm a senior partner in Reed Smith's Insurance Recovery Group in both our Philadelphia and New York offices. And I am joined by my colleagues, Max Louik, a partner in our Pittsburgh office, Chris Kuleba, a partner in our Miami office, and Esther Kim, a senior associate in our Philadelphia office. Natural disasters are covered by first-party property policies, including wildfires, hurricanes, and windstorms. And this topic is particularly timely given the tragic events that have been ongoing in LA for the last several weeks. Moody's, among other estimators, have proposed that the insured losses from the 2025 LA wildfire claims will likely be in excess of $20 to $30 billion dollars. Other prognosticators have estimates that are even higher. An LA Times article earlier this week stated that the wildfires have damaged or destroyed about $350 million in public infrastructure. And as of another estimate earlier this week, over 16,000 structures have been destroyed in both the Palisades and Eaton fires. For individuals and businesses affected by these events, United Policyholders, a nonprofit organization based in San Francisco, has a page dedicated to the wildfires with information and resources on submitting insurance claims and disaster recovery that has a whole lot of useful information. And in addition to that, the California Department of Insurance, which has been particularly active in the post-wildfire time, has the latest announcements and updates regarding what the insurance department is doing on behalf of policyholders with respect to their insurance policies and claims resulting from the wildfires. So with that introduction, let's talk about what you take as your first steps in dealing with a natural disaster loss. And I'm going to pass it over to Esther to pick it up from here.
Esther: Thanks, John. So when your property has been damaged by a natural disaster, you should first review all of your insurance policies to determine which policy provides coverage for that specific property and cause of loss. Most individuals and businesses will generally have one policy that responds. For a business, the commercial property and business interruption policy will likely cover losses caused by natural disasters and lot fires. In California, after a property loss, an insurance company must provide free of charge a complete and current copy of an insurance policy within 30 days of a policyholder requesting it. So that's helpful if you need a copy of your policy. Also make sure to request an electronic copy of the policy if you're experiencing a complete property loss and would prefer the policy to be sent to your email. Once you have reviewed your policy, then you will need to submit a notice of claim to the insurance company. So I will now turn it over to Max to discuss best practices for submitting a claim.
Max: Thanks, Esther. I think, you know, when it comes to submitting a claim, the bottom line is one of the most critical things you can do is submit a claim in writing to the insurance company and to do so as soon as possible, especially when you're facing a natural disaster like the kind we have seen unfold in Los Angeles, where there'll be lots of claimants making those claims, it's important to get your claim in writing and get it in early. Now, typically your policy will specify how to submit a claim. It may say who to send it to, their email addresses, their mailing addresses, that type of information. For best practice, if there's both a mailing address and an email address, we suggest that you notify the carrier through both means, if you can. You should also consider involving your broker. They should be familiar with how to submit claims to the particular carrier that issued your policy. And if you're a business submitting a notice of claim as opposed to an individual. Strongly consider providing notice on behalf of not only the insured company, but also all of its affiliates and subsidiaries to make clear that you're providing notice on behalf of every entity that might be insured and has suffered a loss under that policy. You want to include all losses known or losses that are suspected in your notice. And consider using a descriptor like, you know, providing notice of this and all related losses when describing your known loss. I think I mentioned as the timing, it's important to do provide notice as soon as you can. Typically, a policy will include some language to that effect. It'll say you need to provide notice as soon as practicable. It might purport to require prompt notice of the loss or damage, including a description of the items of property damaged, the cause of the damage, and the time it occurred. But don't let perfect be the enemy of the good. Since you could submit updates to the insurance company and supplement your notice of claim, it's important to submit the notice as early as possible. Prevent the insurance company from raising any late notice offenses to potentially exclude coverage down the line. Now, if you're listening to this a long time after you have suffered a loss due to a natural disaster, don't worry. You still want to provide notice as soon as you can, but California and other states generally follow a notice prejudice rule, although some jurisdictions do vary. But under the notice prejudice rule, even if your notice is technically late or wasn't as soon as practicable as the policy might require, in order for the insurance company to deny coverage on the basis of late notice, it's going to need to show that it was substantially prejudiced by the timing of your notice. Now that could be another podcast topic entirely, but I did just want to allay any fears. Yes, get it in as soon as you can, but it's never too late under many circumstances. So after you provide notice, the next step really is that the insurance company will require you to submit a proof of loss. And we're going to address that next. I'm going to pass it to Chris. Can you tell us about submitting a proof of loss to the carrier?
Chris: Yeah, sure. And just a practical tip. To Max's point, notice the insurance company needs to be timely. If you are in a situation where you don't have a copy of your policy because, for example, it was in your property when it burned, you haven't received a copy either by physical mail or more likely electronic mail from your insurance company, in order to avoid a situation where an insurance company may try to assert a late notice defense, it may be a good idea to check the insurance company's website, which will often have email addresses or even physical addresses to send your notice of claim before you even receive your policy. So just a sort of best practices tip there. In terms of proofs of loss, typically those are going to be due. This is going to be policy dependent. So again, always look at your policy, but typically these are going to be due within 60 days of your loss or within 60 to 90 days of the insurance company's request for a proof of loss. So some of our listeners may find themselves in a situation where they've given notice to their insurance company, there's some back and forth with the insurance company, you are providing documents, you're providing evidence of your loss, but there's been no formal request for proof of loss. Unless the policy requires the proof of loss automatically without a request from the insurance company, you're under no obligation to provide a formal proof of loss, which, by the way, is a sworn statement setting forth typically what the cause of loss is in your view and what your damages are. There's no requirement to submit that unless there's a request by the insurance company absent, again, express language in the policy saying you have to do it no matter what within a certain time after the loss. Again, if you are in a situation where you know within the 60 days of some of your damages, but your investigation is still continuing or your damages are continuing, a good best practice is to mention to your insurance company just that, that you're still investigating, your damages are continuing, your proof of loss is based on what you currently know and have currently been able to quantify, but you reserve the right to amend it and supplement it as additional information comes to light later on in the process. So that's really some of the high-level tips on proof of loss. I'm going to turn it back over to Esther to talk about whether you should start repairing or cleaning up the property, whether and when following your notice of claim.
Esther: So after a loss has occurred, some tips to keep in mind. Make sure to preserve evidence and documents relating to the damage and obtain approval from your insurance company before replacing or removing damaged property. Try to mitigate further losses where possible and send out document preservation notices to anyone that may have relevant information relating to the loss so all materials are preserved. Also, be sure to provide all necessary and relevant documentation to the insurance company as they become available and provide these updates in writing. And it is helpful to have a point person, for instance, within your company for communications with the insurance company to ensure consistency and control over the information provided. Now that we've discussed submitting a claim and a proof of loss to the insurance company, we wanted to highlight some conditions that policyholders should be aware of for most property policies. And Max and Chris will discuss some of these conditions.
Chris: Yeah, if I could just jump in quickly, because I think the document requests from the insurance company are going to be one of these. Most property policies are going to give the insured the option to either produce documents to the insurance company or, particularly with respect to businesses, allow the insurance company to actually come to the business and search the business's books and records themselves. Generally speaking, exercising the option to have the insurance company come out and take a look at the documents themselves is a good option. Obviously, if there's sensitive documents in the files, you're going to want to account for that by entering into a confidentiality agreement or entering into some sort of protocol with the insurance company where they allow you to sort of screen or segregate those documents from the larger set so they're not skimming through unnecessary and irrelevant private information. An example of this is a homeowners association. If you have damage to your condominium, for example, and the insurance company comes in to inspect, you may want to exclude from the set that they review the personal records and financial information of your residence. The reason I think that that's a good option as opposed to producing documents is because invariably when an insurer decides to produce documents, the insurance company is going to follow up their receipt with additional requests and that process can significantly drag on the claim resolution process because inevitably there will be more documentation that the insurance company thinks may exist and will continue to ask you to produce it. But if they come out to the site to actually review the documents themselves, that can really cut through some of that back and forth. So Max, I'll kick it to you to discuss some of the other post-loss conditions and I'll jump in as we continue.
Max: Yeah, thanks, Chris. I mean, I do think that's a really important point, but sometimes, you know, that might not be an option that's available to you as an insured. And, you know, whether it is or it isn't, Most insurance policies of the type that we're talking about are going to include what's called a cooperation clause, and that essentially obligates the policyholder to cooperate with the insurance company during the investigation of the loss. And to the extent the insurance company is submitting requests for information to you and you're unable to bring them onto the site to review the records themselves and you have to provide information or documents to them, it's really important. It seems basic, but it's really important to document what the requests are, especially if they're made over the phone. And it's important to document the information and responses that you're providing to the insurance carrier. So if you have telephone conversations with the insurance company or your broker does, make sure those communications are noted and follow up with a confirmation email clarifying that you've understood what it is the insurance company is asking and the insurance company understands what it is you're providing. And that's going to go a long way just in case down the road something needs to get litigated. You want to document a record as best you can. So that's generally the best process for cooperating. But Chris, can you speak a little bit about when an insurance company asks for an appraisal, what should our policyholders do then?
Chris: Sure. So appraisal in general is an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. And what I mean by that is it's a way to resolve certain disputes without actually going to court and litigating these issues. Now, in almost all circumstances, an appraisal provision in a property insurance policy is going to apply to disputes over the amount of laws. That means, for example, you say your damage is $5 million and the insurance company comes in and says it's $500,000. If there are no coverage issues and really no dispute over causation as really should be the case where you have a total loss from a wildfire, then typically, either the insured or the insurance company can demand the appraisal process. And in that instance, the insured will appoint an appraiser, the insurance company will appoint an appraiser, and the two appraisers will decide hopefully on a third umpire who will kind of be the sort of final decision in the appraisal proceeding. Now, in California, though, where there's a state-declared disaster, neither side can actually compel the appraisal process. So even if the insurance company or the insured demands appraisal of the loss, in this wildfire scenario, the insurance company or the insured, in that case, cannot be compelled to participate in that process. Generally, though, for natural disasters or any kind of loss, an appraisal for both the insurance companies and the insured is a valuable process to consider because it can result in some significant cost savings, again, as long as the issues are limited to the amount of loss. Typically, and this is the case in California, the appraisal panel cannot decide things like causation. They can't come look at the loss and say, okay, this was definitely caused by a fire. This was definitely caused by a hurricane. This was definitely caused by a pipe leak. They're strictly going to be limited to a determination over the amount of loss. Similarly, if there are disputes over coverage, for example. We agree the loss is this. There's differences in how much it's going to cost to fix it. But there's also issues with respect to whether or not the loss is covered under the terms of the insurance policy. That is not an appraisable issue. And that is likely one that will have to be litigated in court. And almost every state, as far as I'm aware, that that is the case in terms of coverage issues. So that's the appraisal process. I'm going to kick it over back to you now, Max, to talk about some deadlines that the insurance company may be under to provide information and respond to claims.
Max: Yeah, that's right. And actually, this is one area that can be pretty heavily regulated by the various states and their insurance departments and their insurance codes. So for example, in California, an insurance company has 15 days to acknowledge receipt of a claim. An insurance company has 15 days to respond to a written communication from the policyholder regarding a claim and to which, you know, a reply is expected to be made. And in fact, in California, the insurance companies typically have 40 days after a proof of loss is provided to accept or deny the claim or to notify the policyholder that more time is needed and to explain the basis for that additional time. Now, what happens in the unfortunate circumstance where the insurance company denies your claim and you believe it's covered or they're ignoring your claim, unfortunately, you may need to sue the carrier. And the timing of when you sue can be an important issue. Many property insurance policies contain contractual suit limitation clauses that purport to limit the time that you can file a lawsuit. And, you know, usually one or two years. after the date of the loss. However, some of those contractual periods are also governed by insurance regulations. So for example, in California, I think you cannot have shorter than a one-year statute of limitations period. And also, there's a question as to when that statute of limitations period is running and when it's told. So even though it runs from the date of the loss, I can tell you in California, that suit limitation period is automatically told while the insurer is processing the claim. So it may begin on the date of the loss, but once you provide notice, and in that period where the insurance carrier is investigating and deciding whether to provide coverage or not, there's a pause placed on that statute of limitations. So really, it picks up again, after the carrier denies coverage, or they, you know, issue a coverage determination that is less than what you had hoped to receive. So that's important to keep in mind as well, the clock is ticking. But generally, you know, it's not going to be as important to get done as soon as possible, like the timing of the notice itself would be. But okay, so those are some conditions and those are some timing issues. But Esther, can you speak to how you can try and figure out how much coverage you have under your policy, generally speaking, once a loss occurs?
Esther: Sure. When you're first reviewing your policy, you're going to want to look at your declarations, which are at the front of the policy, and it serves as a summary document. It shows, for instance, who the policyholder is, what the policy limits are, the policy period, and whether there are any deductibles, among other things. Endorsements to the policy may modify any of the coverage provisions, so it is important to read those as well. And those are usually at the back of the policy or sometimes in the front of the policy. Insurance companies often attempt to exclude or sublimit coverage for common natural disasters or apply higher deductibles, so you should check your policy carefully. Max, in going through a policy, can you please discuss the types of property evaluation provisions that a policyholder might come across?
Max: Sure. And it's getting into the weeds a little bit, but it can have a profound impact on the amount of recovery an insured is able to procure after a loss. And of course, the policy language is going to govern, but typically we see either two different approaches to evaluating damages. There's an actual cash value approach and a replacement cost value approach. If you have actual cash value coverage, your policy is going to pay the depreciated cost to repair or replace your damaged property. On the other hand, if you have replacement cost coverage, your policy is going to pay the cost to repair or replace your damaged property without deducting for depreciation. So typically, obviously, the replacement cost value coverage tends to be more valuable. And replacement cost coverage may require actual repair or replacement of the property and that it be made as soon as possible after the damage occurs. But regardless of how those damages are calculated, please remember to request undisputed amounts from your insurance company. In California in particular, if the insurance company accepts your claim, they have to pay the undisputed portion of that claim immediately, but no later than 30 days after they've made that determination.
Chris: Max, if I could, before we jump ahead, there's a couple of points I just wanted to mention about valuation. Sure. So for our listeners, Max mentioned the difference between actual cash value and replacement cost value. Be careful because there are a lot of insurance policies that require, in order for you to take advantage of the replacement cost coverage, like Max said, you need to repair or replace the property as opposed to just getting estimates to do it. But also there are limitations in the policy that required you to commence the rebuild to repair process within a certain amount of time. For example, a policy may say you're only getting replacement cost coverage if you start to rebuild the property within one year of the date of loss. Now, where an insured is dependent on their insurance company paying out under the policy in order to be able to afford to repair or rebuild the property, that can be an issue. So be sure to look at your policy, see what the language says, and in all cases, if you don't think that's going to be possible to repair or rebuild within the time required by the insurance policy, request in writing an extension of that period from your insurance company. I've seen many instances where that provision sort of goes unnoticed. The insurance company doesn't mention it to the insured, policyholder doesn't pick up on it, and it can create real issues and cost real dollars if it's not addressed ahead of time. Another sort of valuation and policy limit issue that we didn't talk about. And this applies, there's two different sort of categories. One applies to homeowners typically. And then there's another one that applies mostly to businesses, although it could be present in a commercial property policy as well. Co-insurance. If you've had your insurance for several years and there hasn't been an increase in the dwelling limits, you may want to revisit that issue with your insurance broker because under most property policies, you're going to see what's called a coinsurance penalty, which will penalize the policyholder for not having enough insurance on the property. For example, you bought your insurance policy 10 years ago and you insured it for $600,000 and the insurance company comes in and says, well, the actual cost to replace the dwelling is $800,000. Let's say then you suffer a $100,000 loss on your policy. Because you only had $600,000 in coverage and the replacement cost is actually $800,000 for the property. Which is 75% of $800,000, the insurance company is going to try to penalize you $25,000 or 25% for that $100,000 loss. So be sure to look to make sure that you're insured with enough coverage to avoid co-insurance penalties. And that is a residential and commercial property issue, depending on the policy. The other issue, which is specific to commercial property policies are, and particularly those that insure multiple properties, be careful to make sure that your policy is either a blanket limit policy or a scheduled limit policy. And the difference between those two things is this. Under a blanket limit policy, if you have five properties, a single blanket limit that covers all five properties is available in the event of a loss of any single property. In a scheduled limit policy, each property is going to have its own scheduled limits, not only in most cases for the dwelling coverage, but also for business interruption, for extra expense. All those sort of sub-coverages of the policy may be scheduled as well. And in those cases, you may find yourself in a situation where your property or the subcomponents of the loss are not adequately covered because you do not have that full blanket limit available in the event of an underinsurance issue. So keep those things in mind, too, when you're determining how much coverage you actually have. And I co-authored with a few other people from Reed Smith an article back in October of last year called, in the Daily Business Review, called How Much Coverage Do You Really Have? Valuation and Loss Settlement Provisions and Commercial Property Polities. That goes into detail about some of those issues. And if you have any questions about that, it's worth taking a look at that article.
Max: I think those are really helpful and important tips. I think I'm going to address next some other coverages that might be available to respond beyond those that we've already mentioned, your typical damage to the property policy. Or I think we might've mentioned, or if we haven't, I'll mention now business income losses for when you not only lose your property or lose your factory, but you have lost profits due to the damage that has been caused by the event. And there's various ways that those are going to be calculated and you'll have to check your policy for that or work with your broker or Insurance Coverage Council. But it's important to remember that there are several other coverages that could be available to respond in the event of a loss that you might not currently be thinking about. The first is extra expense coverage. We see that often in commercial property policies. And extra expense coverage is for additional expenses that are incurred in addition to the. That you would incur to continue normal operations or to mitigate your losses while the property is unusable, it's damaged, or it's in the process of being repaired or replaced. So make sure to keep track of your receipts regarding any repairs or replacement of your property and any additional costs and expenses that are needed to continue business operations and keeping things running as normal as possible after the loss. That's where extra expense comes in. There's also contingent time element coverage for business income losses that are caused not directly to you, but that losses that are suffered by a supplier or a customer or parties in your supply chain. Any of those individuals or entities suffering losses may result in you suffering a loss, even if you haven't suffered the natural disaster directly. So those are contingent time element or contingent business income loss coverages. There's also coverages for ingress and egress, really when losses occur that prevent you from accessing your insured property. There's coverage available for that as well. There's civil or military authority coverage for when losses are resulting from governmental or military authority orders that interrupt or reduce your business operations. And finally, there are service interruption coverages for those losses that are sustained due to the interruption of utility services to the insured premises. I think in the case of the California wildfires, all of these coverages are likely to be impacted by many of the businesses and individuals who are in the path of the fire and those who are nearby or in the greater area. So it's important to keep in mind that you may have other coverages available, even if you believe you have not been directly impacted by the loss to date. Chris, let me flip it back to you to talk about a specific issue that we've seen sort of prop up in the context of the LA fires, and that is a matter of causation and what caused the loss.
Chris: Sure. Just for those listeners, to the extent, you know, you're just looking for some information about natural disasters or losses in general, there are two main causation doctrines that the majority of states will follow. One is the concurrent cost doctrine. The concurrent cost auction says that there were two or more perils combined to cause a loss, and at least one of them is covered. The entirety of the loss is going to be covered. An example of that is if you have a home that's suffering from some construction defects, and a hurricane comes along and damages the home, makes those defects worse, causes property damage to the home. All of a sudden, you had some defective windows, for example, and a hurricane came in, and now the windows are leaking like sieves. Your whole house is saturated. it, under that scenario, under the concurrent cause doctrine, your loss should be covered, even though construction defects may be excluded and the hurricane being a covered cause of loss. In California, however, courts follow what's called the efficient proximate cause doctrine. And that doctrine says that where two or more perils combined, only the efficient proximate cause is covered. Typically, that's defined to mean the predominant cause of loss, the one that sets the others in motion. So if you have a causal sequence where there are multiple causes in a chain of causation that ultimately resulted in the loss, if there is one that was the main precipitator of the other causes that set the others in motion almost, but for that initial most important cause, these other ones wouldn't have occurred, that is going to be the relevant cause for determining whether or not your loss is covered. So if that predominant or efficient proximate cause is covered, your loss is covered. If the predominant or efficient proximate cause is excluded, then your loss is likely going to be excluded. We've heard some rumors, despite how obvious it may seem to some, that the cause of the losses that we're seeing in Altadena and Palisades was caused by a fire. We've heard some rumors that some insurance companies are taking the position that this is a wind loss. The efficient approximate cause of the loss is wind. Now, you're going to have to look at your policies, and some courts are undoubtedly going to have to determine that issue. But historically, where you have these fire-related losses. Even though the fire itself is spread by wind, the efficient proximity cause has, in case it's been found to be the fire, in which cases are going to be a covered cause of loss under most property policies in California. One issue that we haven't quite seen yet, but we undoubtedly will, unfortunately, are mudslides. Whenever you have these wildfires that burn and destabilize hillsides and are followed by rains, often in February of the year, you're going to see some mudslides. And there are a fair number of cases in California interpreting whether under most standard California property insurance language, whether the efficient proximate cause of these mudslides is weathered or fire or something else entirely. And there are several cases that hold in the instance of mudslides, the efficient proximate cause of the loss is fire. And some of those cases, for those interested, include Howell, include Garvey, Vardanian, and several others. Happy to talk about those. But one thing to keep in mind is always check your policy. While many policies will cover fire, many will exclude earth movement. Even though earth movement in the event of a mudslide is one of the causes of loss in that chain of causation. If the court or if it's determined that the fire a covered cause of loss is the efficient proximate cause of that loss your loss should be covered despite the existence of a earth movement exclusion and policy now. There is a sort of, there's a bit of a wrinkle to that. So some earth movement exclusions, and we're seeing more and more of this, I think, are stated as sort of a compound exclusion. So not only do they exclude earth movement, which again, if standing alone, should not prevent coverage if the fire was the efficient approximate cause and fire's covered cause of loss, but they're combining the exclusion with earth movement and another cause of loss. So for example, they'll say, we exclude earth movement to the extent earth movement combines with fire, or to the extent earth movement combines with rain to cause the loss. And there's a California Supreme Court case on that issue. It's called Julian. And what Julian says is, well, okay, those types of exclusions are enforceable. They're not an unauthorized end around California's efficient approximate cause doctrine. They're allowed, though only in limited circumstances. And that is where the causal sequence is obvious and known and common. And in that case, it was a exclusion that excluded earth movement to the extent it combined with weather conditions. There was a mudslide and the insurance company took the position that the mudslide damage was excluded. The case went all the way up to the California Supreme Court and the court agreed with the insurance company because of the commonality and the easily understood sequence of events being fire, destabilization of land, rain. Mudslides, damage to the home. Now, Julian has been narrowed pretty significantly since it was decided in 2005. And there are cases out there which have less common fact patterns, but involving rain, involving fires, where Julian has found to be inapplicable. So again, read your policy. These are not cut and dry issues, but that's kind of a high level overview of some of the causation issues you might see as these claims progress in California.
Esther: I wanted to add a quick note about SBA business loans. So if you have a small business or a nonprofit and your losses are not fully covered by insurance, you may consider applying for an SBA loan. The SBA provides low-interest business fiscal disaster loans up to $2 million that can be used to repair or replace fiscal assets, such as property, machinery, and equipment. The SBA also provides low-interest economic injury disaster loans, also up to $2 million, that can be used for working capital and expenses like rent and utilities until normal operations resume. And the qualifications are on the SBA website, so that may be something you want to consider.
John: So I think that brings us to the conclusion of today's podcast, and we thank you all for listening and joining us. Feel free to email any of us with questions or comments. All of us appear on the firm website. In addition, on the firm's website, there is a dedicated page to wildfire and other natural disasters that we've created that is being updated constantly with new information on what is going on in the Los Angeles area and what the insurance department is doing, et cetera. So we encourage you to look at that. We also have an active Reed Smith Insurance Recovery Group LinkedIn page that has a lot of the same information. So please feel free to check those resources or again, reach out to any of us with any questions you may have. And once again, thanks for joining us. And we hope you listen to our next episode of Insured Success.
Outro: Insured Success is a Reed Smith production. Our producer is Ali McCardell. This podcast is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, PodBean, and reedsmith.com. To learn more about Reed Smith's insurance recovery group, please contact insuredsuccess@reedsmith.com.
Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.
All rights reserved.
Transcript is auto-generated.
