Articles Posted in Value of Claim

It will probably happen to most people at one time or another. Including residents of Dallas, Arlington, Grand Prairie, Mansfield, Burleson, Crowley, De Soto, Mesquite, Weatherford, and lots of other towns and cities in North Texas. An insurance company will refuse a reasonable offer from you or your attorney to settle a claim you have against the insured of an insurance company. If it happens – what can be done?

This article will focus on one aspect of the above. That aspect is when a third party claimant has his demand for a settlement refused by the other person’s insurance company. This happens in lots of scenarios but the most common is a car wreck. The most common situation is where the third party causes a wreck wherein the claimant has damages that exceed the insurance policy limits of the third party who caused the damages. Example – The third party has insurance coverage for the state’s required minimum as of this date, $25,000. The person injured has medical bills exceeding $40,000 plus another $10,000 in lost wages, plus he is entitled to compensation for his impairment, and pain and suffering.

Next, the injured person through his attorney demands that the insurance company for the person who caused the wreck to pay $120,000 to settle the claim or policy limits, which ever is less. The insurance company refuses to pay. The injured person sues the person who caused the wreck and gets a judgment for $120,000. The insurance pays only the $25,000 that they insured and now the injured person has a judgment against the responsible person for the balance. Of course, most of the time the only money this person has is the money he is insured for.

What if you live in Fort Worth, Arlington, Grand Prairie, Dallas, Weatherford, or any other town in Texas and you are in a wreck with a drunk driver? Can you get punative damages from your ininsured / underinsured (UM) insurance policy because the other person was drunk at the time of the accident?

This is one of the issues in the case, Suzanne Vanderlinden v. United Services Automobile Association Property and Casualty Insurance Company. This case was decided in 1994, by the Texarkana Court of Appeals.

In this case Vanderlinden was injured in a car wreck caused by a drunk driver. At the trial of this matter the trial judge would not let Vanderlindens’ attorney submit a jury question to the jury asking for punative damages due to the other driver being drunk. Vanderlinden was sueing her own insurance company, United Services Automobile Association Property and Casualty Insurance Company (USAA) to recover monies by way of the underinsured motorist coverage portion of her insurance policy with USAA. The Texarkana Court cited an 1849, Texas Supreme Court case saying, “Punative damages are typically not to compensate a damaged plaintiff for his injuries; rather, they are to discourage the defendant from continuing his heinous activities and to likewise discourage others from similarly misbehaving.” Thus, the issue in this case is whether an injured person may obtain punative damages from the injured persons insurance company through the underinsured motorist clause.

What does “Stowers” mean to someone in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Fort Worth, Dallas, Weatherford, or anywhere else in Texas? This is something very important to understand.

A Stowers claim is a claim that an insurance company has handled in an improper manner. Most incorrect claims handling by an insurance company can be called “bad faith”, and the Stowers claim is just a different and unique version of bad faith. This Stowers doctrine was first articulated in the case, Stowers Furniture Co. v. American Indemnity Co. This is an old case, decided in 1929, but is still good law. This case was decided by what is today, the Texas Supreme Court. In 1929, it was called the Texas Commission of Appeals. When an insurance company violates their duty under the Stowers doctrine, the insurance company can become liable for much more money than the insurance policy provides for in the insurance contract.

A Stowers action arises when the liability carrier fails to make a reasonable settlement within the policy limits, and subsequently, exposes their insured policyholder to a judgment in excess of the policy limits. This Stowers claim belongs to the insured policyholder, not the person sueing the policyholder. What usually happens when the Stowers duty is violated, is that the policyholder assigns the Stowers claim to whoever is sueing the policyholder.

For the Grand Prairie resident or the resident in Arlington, Weatherford, Fort Worth, or Dallas, the concern is – What do I get paid if the insurance company does me wrong.

There are several types of damages to be recovered, depending on the wrong committed by the insurance company. This article will deal with “actual damages” and the recovery of policy benefits.

It makes sense that the most common actual damages are the policy benefits themselves. As a matter of law, at least in certain cases, the amount of policy benefits wrongfully withheld is an element of damages caused by the insurance companies wrongful conduct in the matter. This was stated in the Texas Supreme Court case, Vail v. Texas Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. This was a 1988 court decision where the Court rejected Texas Farm Bureau’s arguement that damages for an unfair settlement practice had to be something more than the amounts due under the policy. The Supreme Court said that damages for a wrongful refusal to pay are at least equal to the policy benefits, as a matter of law. The Court in its reasoning stated:

If you get treated wrongly by your insurance company and you live in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Mansfield, Weatherford, Fort Worth, or Dallas, the first thing you should do is find an Insurance Law Attorney. He will tell you some of the following:

A plaintiff who prevails against an insurance company may obtain:

a) actual damages b) additional damages if the insurance company acted knowingly c) court costs d) attorney’s fees e) other monies depending on the wrongful act This article will deal just with one potential recovery, that being, the actual damages.

A lot of homeowners insurance policies in Texas have “appraisal” clauses written into them. So whether you live in Weatherford, Texas, or in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Fort Worth or Dallas, if you have homeowners insurance you need to be aware of these appraisal paragraphs.

An appraisal paragraph is of benefit to the insurance company. That is why they put it into the insurance policy. When the homeowner and the insurance company cannot reach an agreement on the amount of money that should be paid on a claim, the insurance company will try to invoke the appraisal clause in the insurance contract. Appraisal happens when the insurance company knows they owe the homeowner money, but there is a dispute as to how much money is owed.

The United States District Court, Southern Division, recently handled a case where the issue was whether the homeowner properly defeated the insurance company trying to invoke the appraisal process. The style of the case is, Hector Sanchez v. Property and Casualty Insurance Company of Hartford and Irene Bernardo. The courts’ opinion was handed down on January 27, 2010.

The Texas Windstorm Insurance Association, has found itself in an unfortunate position. The position is a creation of their own actions. Those actions were actions whereby they refused to pay proper claims to policyholders who suffered damages because of the hurricanes, Ike, Dolly, and Rita.

TWIA is crying “help” because they are afraid they are going to be punished for not properly paying claims to their policyholders. They are asking that they be immune from paying penalties, policyholder attorneys’ fees, and other expenses coming out of litigation that resulted from their conduct.

The windstorm association is a state-created insurer and is claiming that because they are an instrument of government that they should have immunity. Lawyers for the policyholders say that TWIA is effectively a private company, and that immunity would effect the over 900 lawsuits pending against TWIA.

Can it be a surprise? Insurance companies appear to be getting caught in under paying on claims. The Texas Windstorm Insurance Association (TWIA) seems to be caught in some controversy regarding its claims handling along the Texas Gulf Coast. Keep in mind the problems being experienced could just as easily be happening in Fort Worth, Dallas, Grand Prairie, Arlington, or even a small town like Weatherford out in Parker County.

This problem is written about in an article in the Houston Chronicle titled “Lawsuit Says Windstorm Insurer Rigged Process”. The article discusses TWIA using prices lower than market rates to estimate materials and repair costs. TWIA is said to also be unfairly limiting costs on roof repairs and discouraging the reopening of closed claims.

In a lawsuit resulting from some of the abuses by TWIA, documents and software is said to have been discovered that supports the claims that the abuses are being committed. One example of the abuse was discovered when one adjusting firm reported the market rate for roof repairs to be $230 to $255 per 100 square feet, but TWIA’s price was $182. In another situation it is said that they suggested using shingles off one house that were not in too bad shape, to put on another house. This does not sound right to most people but may actually be allowed depending on the language in the insurance policy.

Pretend for a minute that you are driving your car in the Dallas Fort Worth area going west. You drive through Grand Prairie and Arlington and are on your way to Weatherford to enjoy the “First Monday” market. All of a sudden a dog runs in front of you and you swerve to miss it and hit a telephone pole. You are lucky in that no one is injured, but your car has $3800 worth of property damage. You are lucky again because you have collision coverage on your automobile and they repair your car and you are only out a $500 deductible.

Sounds ok so far, right. Well think about it for a minute. Your car was only a year old because you sell your car every two to three years and buy a new one. When you sell this one you will either have to disclose to the buyer the wreck or they will easily find out. So what does that mean? It means this: Your car is worth less because of the wreck than it would have been had it not been involved in a wreck. This is called the “diminished value”.

The nest question is: What can you do about it? This question was answered by the Texas Supreme Court in 2003. In 2003, the Court decided the case, American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company v. Schaefer. Maunufacturers was Schaefers insurance company. They fixed Schaefers car. Schaefer did not dispute the quality or adequacy of the repairs. But he did say that Manufacturers owed him an additional $2600 due to market perceptions that a damaged and subsequently repaired vehicle is worth less than one that has never been damaged. Again, this is called the diminished value and he expected Manufacturers to pay the extra money to compensate him for the lose.

Texas insurance laws often times require that the insurance company issueing a policy, sell certain types of insurance with at least a minimal amount of coverage. The situation most people are familiar with is that related to automobile insurance coverage. In Texas, according to Texas Transportation Code, Section 601.072, a person cannot legally drive a car unless they have at least $25,000 worth of liabilty coverage. Texas Transportation Code, Section 643.101 requires a minimum amount for tow trucks, Section 643.1015 requires a minimum for school buses, and throughout the Texas Insurance Code and the Texas Transportation Code minimal required limits are spelled out depending on the vehicle driven.

Other types of insurance may have minimums or caps that are required. In other situations, there may not be a minimum that is required by law, rather there is a minimum that is purchased by the person seeking the insurance. These other types of insurance could be homeowners policies, commercial policies, medical malpractice policies, and many others.

What happens if a person’s losses exceed the minimum the insurance company is required to pay? There are three main options here. The first is to accept the amount the insurance company actually has to pay and walk away. The second is to accept what the insurance company actually has to pay and then pursue the individual or company who is insured for the differerence still owing. This is usually (not always) futile in that the individual or company does not have any assets worth seizing to satisfy a judgment beyond what the insurance company pays. The third is one where you would be required to have an experienced Insurance Law Attorney.

Contact Information