A recent decision offers lessons for policyholders under the National Flood Insurance Program. In Zozo Investments LLC and Bertie & Neeka LLC v. First Community Insurance Company, the court dismissed a breach of contract suit with prejudice, finding that the plaintiffs filed their case too late under the strict time limits imposed by federal law. 1
The plaintiffs owned property that was damaged by flooding during Hurricane Ian. At the time of the loss, they were covered by a Standard Flood Insurance Policy issued by First Community Insurance Company, a write-your-own program carrier participating in the National Flood Insurance Program. After filing a claim for the damage, they initially received a check from the insurer. However, that payment was later withdrawn, and on March 13, 2023, the insurer mailed a denial letter explaining that the claim was being rejected due to a prior payment made by Citizens Property Insurance Corporation that exceeded the pre-loss valuation of the property. The denial seemed to be an invalid reason for the national flood carrier to deny the claim, in my opinion.
Months later, after the plaintiffs submitted a sworn proof of loss, the insurer sent a second denial letter on October 19, 2023. The plaintiffs filed suit on October 4, 2024, asserting that the denial breached the insurance contract and that they were entitled to payment for their losses. They argued that the statute of limitations should not have begun running until the second denial was issued, since the earlier letter had not been based on a sworn proof of loss.
The court disagreed. Citing 42 U.S.C. § 4072 and the terms of the Standard Flood Insurance Policy, the court emphasized that policyholders must file any lawsuit within one year from the date a written denial is mailed. It found the March 13 letter was a clear denial, explicitly informing the plaintiffs that their claim payment was denied and that they had 60 days to appeal. The court rejected the notion that a denial must be based on a sworn proof of loss to trigger the limitations period. In fact, it cited several decisions within the Middle District of Florida that uniformly hold the statute of limitations begins to run upon the first written denial, regardless of whether a proof of loss was involved.
The plaintiffs relied on older authority from the Eastern District of Louisiana that supported their position, but the court pointed out that the Fifth Circuit had since disapproved that line of reasoning, clarifying that Section 4072 does not mention proof of loss at all. The first denial letter, not the denial of the proof of loss, started the one-year clock. Because the lawsuit was filed more than a year after the March 13, 2023, denial, it was time-barred and had to be dismissed.
Unlike many insurance disputes governed by state law, NFIP claims are subject to federal statutes and regulations that impose rigid deadlines. Once a denial letter is mailed, the policyholder has exactly one year to file suit in federal court. There are no tolling provisions or extensions based on subsequent correspondence, including denials based on proofs of loss. Policyholders and their attorneys must treat the first denial letter as the start of the countdown. Delaying the decision to pursue litigation, even while submitting additional documentation or engaging in further discussion with the insurer, can be fatal.
The key lesson is that with national flood insurance disputes, timing is everything. The moment a denial letter arrives, the legal clock begins ticking. Any attorney or public adjuster assisting a client with an NFIP claim must carefully track that date. Waiting too long to file suit, even with good-faith efforts to resolve the claim, will result in the courthouse doors closing permanently. That is the hard rule, and this case serves as another firm reminder that it will be strictly enforced.
Thought For The Day
“Better three hours too soon than a minute too late.”
– William Shakespeare
1 Zozo Investments v. First Community Ins. Co., No. 2:24-cv-939 (M.D. Fla. June 25, 2025).