Washington’s Senate Invoice 6031championed by Insurance coverage Commissioner Patty Kuderer, has unanimously handed the State Senate. 1 The invoice would create a standalone crime of insurance coverage fraud and classify it as a Class B felony, punishable by as much as 10 years in jail and vital fines.
On its face, this seems to be a robust, trendy step towards combating fraud within the insurance coverage market. The invoice gives:
An individual is responsible of insurance coverage fraud if the individual knowingly, and with intent to defraud, commits, or conceals any materials info regarding… Submitting an announcement, estimate, bill, bid, proposal, proof of loss, or some other doc that misrepresents the scope of damages or prices of repairs related to a property insurance coverage declare.
That isn’t slim language. It doesn’t restrict the crime to fraud towards insurers. It doesn’t carve out exceptions for contractors, public adjusters, brokers, or insurance coverage firm workers. It applies to “an individual.”
It additional states:
Insurance coverage fraud is a category B felony. Every occasion of insurance coverage fraud constitutes a separate offense.
If somebody knowingly submits an estimate that misrepresents the scope of damages or the prices of repairs related to a property declare, and does so with intent to defraud, the statute defines that as a felony.
So, if an insurance coverage firm adjuster or a vendor knowingly lowers an estimate with out factual help, and does so with intent to misrepresent the true scope or price of harm to be able to scale back cost to a policyholder, does that fall inside this definition? Primarily based strictly on the language above, it might.
There’s, in fact, an necessary authorized distinction between a reputable dispute over valuation and intentional deception. Adjusters are allowed to disagree. They’re allowed to train judgment. They’re allowed to query scope and have an sincere distinction of opinion. However they don’t seem to be allowed to knowingly misrepresent.
Prison fraud requires proof of intent. It requires displaying that the submitted doc was materially false, that the individual submitting it knew it was false, and that the individual supposed to deceive. That may be a excessive bar, and it must be.
Nonetheless, if proof ever demonstrated that an estimate was intentionally altered to misstate the scope of harm or the price of restore, not due to an expert disagreement however due to an intent to underpay by means of deception, or ordered with out justification by a superior desk adjuster, the statutory language doesn’t exempt the claims division.
The following query is whether or not an insurance coverage firm itself might face publicity. Underneath basic rules of company prison legal responsibility, an organization will be held accountable when workers act throughout the scope of their employment and for the advantage of the corporate. If fraudulent practices had been systemic or directed, legal responsibility wouldn’t be restricted to a single particular person. Whether or not prosecutors would pursue such circumstances is one other matter. However legally, the statute doesn’t seem to create a one-way road.
For policyholders, there’s something else vital on this invoice. It expands the definition of “sufferer” to incorporate insurance coverage clients and beneficiaries, making them eligible for prison restitution. That is a crucial recognition that fraud within the insurance coverage world doesn’t solely transfer in a single course.
Fraud is fraud. If an estimate or knowledgeable report is knowingly manipulated to misrepresent the quantity or trigger of harm to be able to cheat a policyholder, the statute’s plain language means that can also be fraud.
The actual check might be enforcement. Will the regulation be utilized evenly? Will this regulation, if handed by the Washington Home and signed by the Governor, defend policyholders with the identical vigor it protects insurers? Will or not it’s used as a protect for integrity moderately than a sword wielded selectively?
Insurance coverage is constructed on belief. When that belief is deliberately damaged, the implications mustn’t rely on who dedicated the act. Washington has written robust phrases into this invoice. I hope it will definitely turns into regulation.
My guess is that Doug Quinn and the American Policyholders Affiliation (APA) will help this laws.
Thought For The Day
“Justice can’t be for one facet alone, however have to be for each.”
—Eleanor Roosevelt
1 Insurance coverage fraud modernization invoice passes state Senate. Workplace of the Ins. Commissioner, Washington State. Feb. 17, 2026.
