Timeline for What is the latest case law defining the time frame reasonable for an insurance company to settle a claim?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jul 7, 2021 at 18:15 | comment | added | kisspuska | I mistakenly referenced paragraph (11) shortened so as to not include: "an insured, claimant, or the physician of either" because I already considered Bob as a "claimant" in light of him not being an "insured" or "the physician of" himself or the insured. | |
Jul 7, 2021 at 17:52 | comment | added | kisspuska | Although the first case I cited is moot, it seems directly relating to the insured (it will be deleted now) | |
Jul 7, 2021 at 17:50 | comment | added | kisspuska | (4) Failing to affirm or deny coverage of claims within a reasonable time after proof of loss requirements have been completed and submitted by the insured. Here, paragraph (4) applies only if the insured submitted proof. (5) Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair, and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear. In (5) it is clear that it is not restricted to be applicable only if the claim is made by the insured. | |
Jul 7, 2021 at 17:47 | comment | added | kisspuska | (11) Delaying the investigation or payment of claims by requiring an insured, claimant[...] | |
Jul 7, 2021 at 17:47 | comment | added | kisspuska | § 790.03 (h) (10) shows it perfectly: "(10) Making known to insureds or claimants a practice of the insurer 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." | |
Jul 7, 2021 at 17:46 | comment | added | kisspuska | I beg your pardon, but the code has separate definitions for "claimant" and "insured". All "insured" making a claim are claimants, and specifically an insured claimant, but a claimant may be a 3rd party, too. Please take a look: | |
Jul 7, 2021 at 17:18 | history | edited | ohwilleke | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1035 characters in body
|
Jul 7, 2021 at 16:45 | history | edited | ohwilleke | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2990 characters in body
|
Jul 7, 2021 at 16:39 | history | edited | ohwilleke | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2990 characters in body
|
Jul 7, 2021 at 16:25 | comment | added | ohwilleke | Bob isn't a "claimant". The "claimant" is the first party insured. Cal. In. Code § 790-790.3 applies if Cobb gets blown off by the insurance company, not if Bob does. | |
Jul 7, 2021 at 5:04 | comment | added | kisspuska | This case has many relevant precedents to this question, I'll update my question: Coleman v. Gulf Ins. Group, 41 Cal.3d 782 (Cal. 1986) | |
Jul 7, 2021 at 4:49 | comment | added | kisspuska | (13) Failing to provide promptly a reasonable explanation of the basis relied on in the insurance policy, in relation to the facts or applicable law, for the denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise settlement. It appears to me that some of the provisions apply towards anyone making a claim, some only to insureds some towards both an insured and a claimant. Am I missing something? | |
Jul 7, 2021 at 4:48 | comment | added | kisspuska | This is what I remembered, and kept bugging my mind: Cal. Ins. Code §790-790.3 (11) Delaying the investigation or payment of claims by requiring a[...] claimant [...] 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. (12) Failing to settle claims promptly, where liability has become apparent, under one portion of the insurance policy coverage in order to influence settlements under other portions of the insurance policy coverage. | |
Jul 6, 2021 at 23:12 | comment | added | kisspuska | Thank you for clarifying the legal duties! It makes sense | |
Jul 6, 2021 at 22:53 | vote | accept | kisspuska | ||
Jul 7, 2021 at 5:22 | |||||
Jul 6, 2021 at 22:36 | history | answered | ohwilleke | CC BY-SA 4.0 |