Reading carrier behavior from CRN data.

Florida is one of the few states in the country with a statutory framework that generates a publicly accessible, detailed record of insurance bad-faith claims before they reach the courthouse. The Civil Remedy Notice (CRN), required by §624.155 of the Florida Statutes, is both a jurisdictional prerequisite for bad-faith litigation and, read in aggregate, one of the most informative public datasets available for plaintiff-side coverage analysis.

What the Civil Remedy Notice is

Florida Statutes §624.155 gives insureds the right to pursue a civil action against a carrier for bad-faith handling of a first-party claim. But to do so, the insured must first file a Civil Remedy Notice with the Florida Department of Financial Services (DFS) and serve it on the insurer. The notice initiates a 60-day cure period during which the carrier may correct the violation. If the carrier does not cure within 60 days, the insured may file suit.

The CRN is a standardized form that captures specific information: the identity of the insurer, the policy number, the type of coverage at issue, the claim number, the alleged statutory violation (from a defined list under §624.155), and a description of the claimed damages. Every CRN filed with DFS becomes a public record, maintained in DFS’s searchable database.

The cure-period mechanism is important: it means CRNs document not just the claim but the carrier’s response, or absence of a response, to an enumerated statutory violation. That is a specific, documented act of carrier conduct, not an allegation, but a regulated interaction with a statutory framework.

The dataset at the market level

Individual CRNs tell you something about a specific claim. Tens of thousands of CRNs, assembled and analyzed in aggregate, tell you something about the market, and about specific carriers operating within it.

At that scale, CRN data surfaces carrier conduct patterns that are invisible in any individual matter: how carriers compare to one another, how behavior varies across lines and jurisdictions, how a carrier’s conduct profile has evolved over time. These are patterns that experienced plaintiff attorneys have always suspected exist, and have never had systematic access to.

The specific signals DAIS extracts from CRN data, and the analytical framework behind them, are part of the intelligence delivered to Founding Members, not a methodology published on a public website. What belongs here is simpler: the patterns are real, they are material to litigation strategy, and they have never been assembled in this form for the plaintiff bar before.

What this means for bad-faith litigation strategy

A plaintiff attorney preparing a bad-faith claim benefits from knowing the carrier’s aggregate CRN history before drafting the notice. Prior CRNs are not individually determinative as evidence of anything, but the pattern shapes the strategic context.

A carrier with a documented pattern of high CRN volume in the same line, the same violation category, and the same jurisdiction as the current matter is a different strategic situation than a carrier with a clean record. The former is potentially dealing with a systemic conduct issue; the latter may represent an outlier. That distinction should shape demand strategy, cure-period expectations, and litigation planning.

The aggregate CRN record also supports expert and damages analysis. A carrier’s pattern of conduct across the market is relevant to the “reasonableness” standard that bad-faith analysis turns on. Knowing how this carrier compares to others operating in the same line, in the same jurisdiction, over the same period is the kind of market-level context that the aggregate data can supply.

Delivered responsibly

The intelligence value of CRN data is at the market level: carrier conduct patterns, propensity signals, benchmark comparisons. Not at the level of specific claimants or individual claims. All DAIS intelligence is delivered in aggregate, anonymized form. Outputs describe institutional conduct across the market; they do not surface records about individual people.

For more on DAIS’s approach, see the Methodology page.

The fuller picture

CRN patterns become more meaningful when layered with carrier financial health. A carrier with a high conduct-risk profile and deteriorating financial standing is a qualitatively different situation than a financially stable carrier with the same CRN history. Founding Members receive both layers.

DAIS’s Carrier Intelligence product brings these layers together: propensity signals from CRN data combined with financial-health indicators, delivering a composite view of carrier posture for bad-faith matters in Florida and Washington.