A recent case involving replacement cost value and actual cash value was recently decided—wrongly.1 The case involved an automobile, and GEICO ripped off its customer by successfully arguing that various items should not be included in actual cash value unless the car is actually replaced. Theoretically, replacement cost and actual cash value are the exact same when an item is brand new. But not if you are insured by GEICO in Illinois. Continue Reading Replacement Cost Value and Actual Cash Value Should Be The Same For a Brand New Item—But Not If You Are Insured By GEICO
The Minnesota Supreme Court issued an opinion in late July that significantly addresses Minnesota Statute § 604.18, commonly known as Minnesota’s “Bad Faith Law.” While arising in the context of an automobile accident, the case of Peterson v. Western National Mutual Insurance Company,1 is still applicable to property insurance claims as § 604.18 applies to both automobile and property insurance claims. Continue Reading A Fair Investigation Means Considering and Weighing All Facts and Circumstances
Last week the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana granted Travelers Indemnity Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment allowing them to dodge hail damage claims made by policyholder Mapleton at Countryside Condominium Association Inc. (“Mapleton”).1 Mapleton brought suit against Travelers for breach of contract and bad faith following two hailstorms impacting their buildings in June 2016 and April 2017. The hailstorms caused damage to the condominium’s siding estimated at $2.58 million. Continue Reading Court Finds Hailstorm Claims Made “Unreasonably Late”
Larry Bache is back by popular demand to answer national level questions posed to us during our recent seminar involving Hurricane Irma claims. I think that the last time Larry Bache was with me on Tuesday at 2, was back on May 18. Continue Reading Tuesday at 2 With Chip Merlin—and Today Includes Larry Bache—Answering Property Insurance Claim Questions
The Certified Question: On July 2, 2020, a Ninth Circuit court of Appeals panel certified the following three-part question to the Nevada Supreme Court:
- Whether, under Nevada law, the burden of proving the applicability of an exception to an exclusion of coverage in an insurance policy falls on the insurer or the insured?
- Whichever party bears such a burden, may it rely on evidence extrinsic to the complaint to carry its burden, and if so,  is it limited to extrinsic evidence available at the time the insured tendered the defense of the lawsuit to the insurer?
The case out of which this certified question arises is Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company.1 Continue Reading Who Has the Burden to Prove an Exception to an Exclusion of Coverage in an Insurance Policy?
Insurance is important. Insurance agents making certain coverage is as good as it gets play a vital role making insurance work. Admittedly, most of us avoid taking enough time with our insurance agents and probably give off too much concern about the cost. Continue Reading Policyholders Need To Speak With Their Insurance Agents More Often
An ensuing loss clause within an insurance policy operates to preserve coverage when a loss excluded under a policy results in a subsequent or “ensuing” loss that otherwise would be covered. Continue Reading Court Predicts Ensuing Loss Clause Provides Coverage For Hotel’s Damage Due To Windstorm, Despite Defective Roof
Back in June 2018, I blogged about the New Jersey Insurance Fair Conduct Act passing the Senate and heading to the Assembly. Unfortunately, many roadblocks (insurance company lobbyists) prevented the Bill from going forward by using propaganda to spread lies about the detrimental effect of passing it. For the foreseeable future, New Jersey will continue to be one of the most difficult states in the country to prove bad faith given their court’s “fairly debatable” standard.1 Continue Reading New York’s Bad Faith Bill Advances Through Assembly Insurance Committee
Should departments of insurance approve forms which limit the amount of mold damage from a covered peril? A new Department of Insurance Bulletin from Louisiana addresses this issue and will be discussed today at Friday at 2 With Chip Merlin. Continue Reading Should Mold Sub-Limits Be Applicable and Remote Public Adjuster Instruction—Important Claims Trends and Questions Answered At Friday At 2 With Chip Merlin
I recently defeated an insurance carrier’s Motion for Summary Judgment in Maryland pertaining to an insured’s alleged failure to comply with policy conditions—specifically, failure to file a timely Proof of Loss. Continue Reading Proofs of Loss: Insurers Must Also Comply With Policy Provisions