This week, in the spirit of the March Madness NCAA Tournament (and the team I have in my bracket to win it all), I decided to research what constitutes insurance bad faith under Kentucky law.

Kentucky law provides the following elements which the policyholder must prove in order to prevail against an insurance company for bad faith whether under common law or statute:

(1) the insurer must be obligated to pay the claim under the terms of the policy;

(2) the insurer must lack a reasonable basis in law or fact for denying the claim; and

(3) it must be shown that the insurer either knew there was no reasonable basis for denying the claim or acted with reckless disregard for whether such a basis existed.1

Like most states, Kentucky has a statute which delineates unfair claims settlement practices. In Kentucky, the Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act (UCSPA),2 an insurance company must comply with the following mandates and refrain from:

(1) Misrepresenting pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions relating to coverages at issue;
(2) Failing to acknowledge and act reasonably promptly upon communications with respect to claims arising under insurance policies;
(3) Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the prompt investigation of claims arising under insurance policies;
(4) Refusing to pay claims without conducting a reasonable investigation based upon all available information;
(5) Failing to affirm or deny coverage of claims within a reasonable time after proof of loss statements have been completed;
(6) Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear;
(7) Compelling insureds to institute litigation to recover amounts due under an insurance policy by offering substantially less than the amounts ultimately recovered in actions brought by such insureds;
(8) Attempting to settle a claim for less than the amount to which a reasonable man would have believed he was entitled by reference to written or printed advertising material accompanying or made part of an application;
(9) Attempting to settle claims on the basis of an application which was altered without notice to, or knowledge or consent of the insured;
(10) Making claims payments to insureds or beneficiaries not accompanied by statement setting forth the coverage under which the payments are being made;
(11) Making known to insureds or claimants a policy of appealing from arbitration awards in favor of insureds or claimants for the purpose of compelling them to accept settlements or compromises less than the amount awarded in arbitration;
(12) Delaying the investigation or payment of claims by requiring an insured, claimant, or the physician of either to submit a preliminary claim report and then requiring the subsequent submission of formal proof of loss forms, both of which submissions contain substantially the same information;
(13) Failing to promptly settle claims, where liability has become reasonably clear, under one (1) portion of the insurance policy coverage in order to influence settlements under other portions of the insurance policy coverage;
(14) Failing to promptly provide a reasonable explanation of the basis in the insurance policy in relation to the facts or applicable law for denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise settlement;
(15) Failing to comply with the decision of an independent review entity to provide coverage for a covered person as a result of an external review in accordance with KRS 304.17A-621, 304.17A-623, and 304.17A-625;
(16) Knowingly and willfully failing to comply with the provisions of KRS 304.17A-714 when collecting claim overpayments from providers; or
(17) Knowingly and willfully failing to comply with the provisions of KRS 304.17A-708 on resolution of payment errors and retroactive denial of claims.

If an insurer fails to settle or pay a claim in good faith the insured can recover prejudgment interest (12% per annum) and reasonable attorney’s fees incurred. This of course would be in addition to the policy benefits which would be owed to the insured if the breach of the insurance contract is proven.

1 Wittmer v. Jones, 864 S.W.2d 885, 890 (Ky. 1993).
2 KRS 304.12-230