If you’ve ever been through a hurricane in Florida, you know the drill. The storm passes, you take a deep breath, and then you begin the long, often frustrating, process of getting your home and your life back together. The last thing you need is more red tape, right?
Well, a new rule being considered by the Florida Board of Professional Engineers (FBPE) might just add a whole lot more of it to the pile.
On the surface, the proposal sounds perfectly reasonable. It’s all about protecting the public from the unlicensed practice of engineering. We all want that. But when you dig into the details, you start to see how this well-intentioned rule could have some serious, and I mean serious, unintended consequences for homeowners trying to get their insurance claims processed.
Let's break down what’s happening and why it’s a much bigger deal than it sounds.
So, What's This New Rule Really About?
At its core, the proposed rule changes how engineering firms can investigate property damage. Specifically, it focuses on who is allowed to gather the information—the "data collection"—at a damaged property.
Right now, the system works a lot like a busy hospital. You have a highly-trained doctor (the licensed Professional Engineer, or PE) who is in charge. But they don't do everything themselves. They rely on a team of skilled nurses and technicians (in this case, engineering interns, building consultants, or qualified inspectors) to gather initial information like taking your temperature, blood pressure, or running basic tests.
The doctor then reviews all that data, uses their expert judgment to make a diagnosis, and signs off on the treatment plan. The doctor is still 100% responsible for the final outcome.
The current system for property inspections is similar. A PE oversees the whole process, but they can send a trusted team member to the site to take photos, get measurements, and document the damage. The PE then meticulously reviews all of this data, applies their engineering principles, and writes the final report, stamping it with their official seal. They are the one legally and ethically on the hook for the report's accuracy.
This new rule, however, wants to change that. It suggests that the licensed PE must be physically present during the data collection.
Think about that for a second. The head surgeon would have to personally wheel every patient from the waiting room. It just doesn't scale, especially not in a crisis.
Here's Why This Could Slow Everything to a Crawl
Imagine another Hurricane Ian hits. Thousands upon thousands of homes have roof damage, water intrusion, and structural issues. Every single one of those homeowners is calling their insurance company, desperate for help.
Insurers, in turn, need engineering reports to understand the extent of the damage and figure out how to pay the claim correctly.
If this new rule passes, every single one of those thousands of homes would have to wait for one of a limited number of licensed PEs to physically show up and take measurements. The qualified inspectors and technicians who normally help with this initial legwork would be sidelined.
The result? A massive bottleneck.
- Longer Wait Times: Instead of getting an inspection team out in days, you could be waiting weeks, or even months, for a PE to become available.
- Delayed Reports: With the PE having to do all the fieldwork, it takes them away from the crucial work of analyzing the data and writing the reports. The whole process slows down.
- Delayed Claim Payments: Your insurance company can't pay your claim until they have the expert report. No report, no check. This means you’re stuck in limbo, unable to start repairs and get your life back to normal.
Honestly, it feels like a solution in search of a problem. The current system has checks and balances. The PE is still the one making the final call and taking all the responsibility. This proposal doesn't add a layer of safety; it just adds a layer of inefficiency.
The Ripple Effect We're Not Talking About
The problems don't stop with just slowing things down. This could have a much wider impact on Florida's insurance market, and none of it is good for consumers.
It's All About "Responsible Supervision"
The FBPE’s argument is that a PE can't be "responsibly supervising" if they aren't physically on site. But that’s a pretty old-school way of looking at supervision in the 21st century.
Today, we have incredible technology. High-resolution photos, drone footage, video calls, and instant data sharing. A PE can sit at their desk and see exactly what the field inspector is seeing, guiding them in real-time if needed. They can review every single piece of data collected before making their final engineering judgment.
To say that physical presence is the only form of valid supervision ignores how work gets done today. The final, signed-and-sealed report is the product of the PE's professional work. How they get the raw data, as long as it's done competently and under their direct control, shouldn't be the issue.
What Happens Next?
If this rule goes through, I see a few things happening.
First, the cost of engineering services will almost certainly go up. With PEs being a limited resource, their time will become even more valuable, and that cost will eventually be passed down to policyholders.
Second, it could push more claims into litigation. When claims are delayed, homeowners get frustrated (and rightfully so!). They hire attorneys, and the whole thing ends up in a messy, expensive legal battle that helps no one but the lawyers.
And finally, it makes it harder for everyone to recover after a storm. The goal should be to get people the help they need as quickly and efficiently as possible. This rule, despite its good intentions, does the exact opposite. It creates a system that is slower, more expensive, and more frustrating for the very people it's supposed to protect.
This is still a proposal, and people in the insurance and engineering worlds are raising these exact concerns. Let's hope the board listens. Because in the aftermath of a disaster, the last thing Floridians need is a bureaucratic logjam preventing them from rebuilding their lives.
