Connect with us

Business

Home insurer surcharges for wildfires is legal, judge rules

Published

on

Home insurer surcharges for wildfires is legal, judge rules

Surcharges that California homeowners have been hit with statewide by insurers defraying the costs of Los Angeles County’s wildfires were ruled legal in a decision released late Tuesday.

L.A. County Superior Court Judge Tiana Murillo turned down a petition by advocacy group Consumer Watchdog to halt the charges, which insurers began levying last year after the state’s insurer of last resort couldn’t pay all its January 2025 fire claims.

The California FAIR Plan, financially backed and operated by the state’s licensed home insurers, needed a $1-billion bailout from the insurers after it was hit with some $4 billion in claims.

Under a deal Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara worked out with the FAIR Plan in 2024, the insurers could seek state approval to surcharge their residential policyholders for up to half of any assessment totaling $1 billion in case the plan needed a bailout in an “extreme worst case scenario” — as it turned out it did.

Advertisement

A total of 105 insurers, including State Farm General — California’s largest home insurer — Farmers and Mercury sought and received approval for the surcharges.

Because the FAIR Plan assessed its member insurers based on their share of the state’s home insurance market, the policyholder surcharges were in the same ballpark. The median fee for homeowners was $28, according to the department of insurance.

The fee can be more or less according to the size of a homeowner’s premium and is split into monthly payments that insurers can spread over one or two years. Condo owners and renters on average were surcharged less.

In a court filing, Consumer Watchdog said $420 million in surcharges were approved.

In its April 2025 lawsuit filed against Lara, the Los Angeles group made a series of arguments in seeking to overturn the residential surcharges, which it deemed an industry bailout. It did not sue over related commercial surcharges.

Advertisement

Consumer Watchdog contended in its lawsuit that the surcharges violated Proposition 103 — the 1988 measure that governs insurer rate hikes — because the proposition does not allow for them.

It also claimed Lara did not follow regulatory protocol in promulgating the new policy.

The group further alleged that the FAIR Plan’s governing statutes do not give Lara the authority to permit the surcharges — and that the statutes require insurers to share in the plan’s profits and losses, and not shift losses to policyholders.

Murillo, and another judge who previously heard the case, turned down all of the consumer group’s arguments in separate rulings, the last of which Murillo issued Tuesday night.

Lara celebrated his legal victory over Consumer Watchdog, which has accused Lara of having close ties to insurers and sought to oust him from office. His terms ends in January.

Advertisement

“This victory sends a loud and clear message: The era of allowing special interests to derail consumer choice is over. We have the momentum, we have the authority, and we will continue to fight until every Californian has access to the coverage they deserve,” Lara said in a statement.

Attorney Will Pletcher, litigation director of Consumer Watchdog, said the group disagreed with the decision and would “consider all options to move this forward.”

“It’s important to try to protect California consumers from these surcharges that we think are in pretty clear conflict with both Proposition 103 and the FAIR Plan,” he said.

Hilary McLean, a spokesperson for the plan, said in a statement it did not have any position on the ruling, given the plan “does not have a role in determining how insurers manage costs associated with assessment.”

Denni Ritter, vice president of state government relations for the American Property Casualty Insurance Assn., a major industry trade group, said the decision rejected “the reckless lawsuit brought by the self-interested group Consumer Watchdog…”

Advertisement

“This ruling preserves a vital tool to protect the stability of the California insurance market. Blocking cost recovery would have undermined the state’s last-resort coverage option,” she said in a statement.

The 2024 policy was issued in response to the rapid growth of the plan due to a series of wildfires over the last decade that prompted multiple insurers to retreat from the state’s home insurance market.

The plan had 264,000 homeowners on its rolls in September 2022, a figure that rose to 452,0000 in the months before the fires — and its residential policyholders have since increased to 663,000 as of March.

The FAIR Plan offers policies that typically cost more than those issued by regular insurers while offering less coverage.

A Times analysis last year found that in the Palisades and Eaton fire zones, the plan’s rolls nearly doubled to 28,440 from 2020 to 2024.

Advertisement

That concentration of policyholders led to the plan’s large losses during the Jan. 7 wildfires, which damaged or destroyed more than 18,000 structures, killing at least 31 people.

It’s been estimated that the insured losses for the wildfires could ultimately total as much as $40 billion, exceeding any past wildfires worldwide. Ritter said that so far insurers have paid $23.7 billion in claims.

The 2025 wildfires were not the only time the FAIR Plan has needed a bailout, though it is the first time its member insurers surcharged policyholders.

In 1993, it assessed carriers after fires in Altadena and Malibu, and in 1994 it did so after the Northridge earthquake. The assessments totaled $260 million.

The plan received approval this year from the insurance department for a 29% rate increase for its homeowner dwelling policy that will take effect in October.

Advertisement

Business

Meta discontinues Instagram feature on new AI image generation tool after Hollywood backlash

Published

on

Meta discontinues Instagram feature on new AI image generation tool after Hollywood backlash

A new tool that let people take publicly posted Instagram photos and use AI to generate new images from them drew such a big backlash in Hollywood that Meta has discontinued one of the features.

Instagram’s parent company, Meta, on Tuesday rolled out the new AI tool, called Muse Image, which makes it easy to “turn your ideas into high-quality visuals you can download and share anywhere.”

In a promotional video, Meta showed examples like adding a friend into a band photo.

But the tool came under fire from talent agencies, managers and union officials. They noted that many Instagram accounts were opted in by default, allowing users to manipulate the image and likeness of celebrities without their consent.

“I just think it’s wrong again to expect people to opt themselves out of something that literally has been proven to be able to create harm,” said Kyle Hjelmeseth, chief executive of Los Angeles-based influencer talent management firm G&B.

Advertisement

By Friday, Meta said a feature on Muse Image that helps pull photos from public Instagram accounts was no longer available.

“Earlier this week, we announced that one way for people to generate images in Meta AI is by @-mentioning public Instagram accounts that they want to reference,” Meta said in a blog post. “Our intent was to provide a useful creative tool and to give people control over whether their public content could be referenced in this way. We’ve heard the feedback that this feature missed the mark, so it’s no longer available.”

Creative Artists Agency, which raised concerns to Meta on behalf of its clients, commended the tech company for its swift decision.

“Putting individual rights and consent at the forefront is essential to building responsible technology,” the Century City-based talent agency said in a statement. “We look forward to ongoing conversations to ensure creators stay protected as technology evolves.”

Hollywood has long been wary of AI, after a string of deepfakes — videos or images depicting celebrities doing or saying things they never authorized. Jamie Lee Curtis and others have appeared in ads for products they never endorsed. Last year, OpenAI’s Sora 2 video tool drew outrage in Hollywood after users conjured up dead celebrities without their estates’ consent. OpenAI later said it would give rights holders more granular controls.

Advertisement

After Meta rolled out its new tool, there was immediate backlash from Hollywood.

“Anything other than a clear and conspicuous OPT-IN for these types of uses of Instagram users’ images is unacceptable, and an utter miscalculation of public sentiment regarding the obvious dangers and harms inherent in such use,” performers union SAG-AFTRA said in a statement.

United Talent Agency was also critical of Meta, saying it demands opt-in for the use of likeness, image and intellectual property of its clients on any platform.

“The use of such property without OPT-IN consent, credit and compensation is exploitation, not innovation,” the Beverly Hills-based talent agency said.

Meta’s initial response on Wednesday was that users can choose to opt out of having their photos used by Muse Image by changing their settings.

Advertisement

“We built Muse Image with strong controls and safety guardrails from day one,” Meta said in a statement. “Private accounts and those belonging to users under 18 are automatically excluded and adult users with public accounts can opt out with just a couple clicks. We will take action against any content that violates our Community Standards.”

Two days later, Meta removed a key feature from Muse Image, saying it received feedback that it “missed the mark.”

The launch fits a familiar Silicon Valley pattern — ship products first, ask for forgiveness later.

“They leverage their scale to make it easy to use the tools as well as to scale out the content that is available,” said Mickey Maher, chief business officer at Vermillio, which tracks people’s digital likenesses and intellectual property. “It’s not unique to this Meta product.”

Others said opt-out should be the default.

Advertisement

“This dark pattern of AI overreach, where essentially it’s a free-for-all when it comes to your content, information, is something that nobody actually wants,” said Lori Fena, former chair and executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and co-founder of New York-based Personal Digital Spaces. “What we need in this new AI ecosystem is the ability to create trust and to have some sort of understanding and authenticity, and this does exactly the opposite.”

Continue Reading

Business

Legendary Television City may be be sold in further blow to Hollywood

Published

on

Legendary Television City may be be sold in further blow to Hollywood

Television City, one of the most famous studios in the entertainment industry where generations of TV shows have been created, is expected to hit the market again as its owner grapples with debt.

It’s the latest sign of distress in Hollywood as the film and TV industry struggles from a sharp falloff in production activity across Southern California.

Television City’s owner, Hackman Capital Partners, is already in the process of selling the historic Radford Studio Center, which gave L.A.’s Studio City neighborhood its name. Hackman defaulted on a $1.1-billion mortgage in January and investment bank Goldman Sachs took over the property, which is now escrow for a sale to Netflix.

The sprawling Television City property is one of the most desirable locations in Los Angeles, sharing fences with the Original Farmers Market and the luxury Grove outdoor shopping center, each of which attracts millions of visitors every year.

Advertisement

If the studio at Beverly Boulevard and Fairfax Avenue where “American Idol,” “All in the Family” and scores of other shows were filmed becomes available as expected, the owners of the Grove and the Farmers Market would be among the likely contenders for the property for potential expansion of their businesses, said sources familiar with the matter who were not authorized to comment.

Grove owner Rick Caruso was among the bidders for Television City, formerly known as CBS Television City, last time it was on the market and could emerge as a possible bidder.

The highest bid when broadcaster CBS sold the studio in 2019 came from Hackman Capital Partners, an international movie studio operator and commercial property landlord that paid $750 million for the 25-acre site that is near Hollywood, Beverly Hills and and the Sunset Strip.

Hackman Capital’s plan to recoup its investment included continuing to operate Television City as a studio for rent while adding new revenue-generating features.

Last year the city approved Hackman Capital’s $1-billion plan to add 980,000 square feet of offices, sound stages, production facilities and retail space.

Advertisement

The original studio designed by famed Los Angeles architect William Pereira erected in 1952 has city landmark protections, but newer structures on the property do not and there are acres of surface parking that could be converted to other uses.

Both Caruso and Farmers Market owners A.F. Gilmore have sued to limit the planned expansion of the studio, calling it a “massively scaled” development that “would overwhelm, disrupt, and forever transform the community.”

The debate over the development has played out amid a serious downturn in the region’s entertainment industry, with studios shifting film and television production to Georgia, New Mexico and other out-of-state locations.

L.A.’s entertainment industry also suffered a series of blows including the COVID-19 shutdown, strikes by writers and directors in 2023 and cutbacks at studios that reduced demand for sound stages.

A group of Hackman Capital’s lenders led by Deutsche Bank filed a notice of default last month, saying they’re owed more than $357 million. Hackman Capital is still trying to renegotiate its debt.

Advertisement

“The studio market is evolving, and the financing environment for studio assets remains complex,” Chief Executive Michael Hackman said in a statement. “We are engaged in active discussions with our lending partners and are carefully evaluating all of the alternatives.”

A person familiar with the process but not authorized to speak about it publicly said Hackman Capital will be hard-pressed to pay its debt in light of challenges facing the industry. The notice of default is “the baby step to put Television City in play” for new buyers, the source said, “and it is in play.”

Already in play is Manhattan Beach Studios, another Hackman Capital property encumbered by a $240-million loan from Deutsche Bank that the lender is in the process of selling. A buyer could foreclose on the property and potentially change its use to advanced manufacturing such as aerospace or defense, which is in high demand in Southern California.

Brokerage Cushman & Wakefield, which is managing the sale, emphasized in marketing materials that the 22-acre site has “significant available power capacity” and “offers flexible uses” on “some of the most irreplaceable underlying land in the South Bay.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Los Angeles hotels saved by last-minute surge in World Cup bookings

Published

on

Los Angeles hotels saved by last-minute surge in World Cup bookings

After showing worryingly weak early interest, World Cup fans showed up at the last minute to boost Los Angeles hotel occupancy and room rates.

Ahead of the last tournament game in Los Angeles is on Friday, hotels popular with soccer fans said they were full and charging higher rates.

In early May, the American Hotel and Lodging Assn. reported a lack of hotel bookings just a month shy of the games.

About 80% of respondents said hotel bookings were below initial expectations, and more than 65% of L.A. respondents said bookings were lower than a typical summer. In the report, half of the L.A. hotel respondents said they assumed that visa barriers and distance from venues were contributing to the low early bookings.

Advertisement

The turnout that many were concerned had also been hurt by high ticket prices ended up being better than those first projections.

The Pierside in Santa Monica has been exceptionally busy during the World Cup, with many tourists opting to stay near the beach despite the longer trek to SoFi Stadium where the games are held. The Pierside has no rooms for this weekend.

“We’ll have a day or two gap, but other than that we’ve been full,” said a Pierside manager. “I think beach-side hotels have been busier, because tourists are more interested in going to the beach while here.”

In the so-called Stadium District, the Anthem Hotel saw even greater numbers of tourists than they had initially expected for the tournament, including both domestic and international guests.

Its few remaining rooms were going for more than $500 per night late in the week.

Advertisement

“Many guests are planning longer stays, using match days as the centerpiece of a broader Los Angeles itinerary,” said Ruben Flores, general manager at the hotel. “Being in the heart of the Stadium District puts us in a unique position to welcome fans who want the energy of the tournament to extend beyond the stadium.”

Downtown L.A.‘s Hotel Indigo got a surge in bookings the days leading up to the July 2 knockout game between Spain and Austria. Previously, FIFA had reserved thousands of rooms downtown for staff, media, and other stakeholders, but later canceled the reservation.

The American Hotel and Lodging Assn. attributed the delayed booking boom to young international travelers waiting until right before the game to book hotels in search of last-minute deals.

“Demand has picked up, consistent with a recent trend toward shorter booking windows for events of this caliber,” Rosanna Maietta, the association’s chief executive, said in a statement. “Unlike typical leisure travel, many travelers finalized plans and secured tickets closer to the start of the games.”

Not all hotels have seen the last-minute boom in bookings. Hotel June next to Los Angeles International Airport said its bookings were lower than expected.

Advertisement

“We were expecting more reservations, but I think it’s because the rates have gone up,” said Kira Moreno from Hotel June. “We have still been steady but not been too full or too busy, pretty similar to any other day.”

Airbnb proved to be a popular alternative to traditional hotels, with offers like the World Cup bundle, which included free World Cup tickets with select Airbnb stays at an average price of $365 per night.

In recent years, L.A. has struggled to bring tourists into the city. Last year, the number of international tourists went down by 5.5% from the year before, marking the first time tourism had fallen since the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic.

Immigration raids and wildfires dissuaded tourists from visiting, and even Canadian tourists who typically make up the largest number of foreign visitors to California dropped 21%.

Increased flight costs also discouraged many tourists. With the U.S.-Iran conflict continuing and the Strait of Hormuz closed, jet fuel prices skyrocketed, making international travel unrealistic for many tourists. International air travel to L.A. County had already fallen 30% from August to November 2025.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending