Engaged by carrier’s defense counsel to analyze claims handling of an Underinsured Motorist claim resulting from a low-speed accident. The claim was complicated by the policyholder’s son having his own Personal Auto Policy, reporting the injury 5 months after the accident, whether he was a household resident, and the possibility the injury was work related. Attorneys Philip Overcash and Tyler Milliron, Kutak Rock LLP (480) 429-5000. Wintrow v. USAA, Case No. CV2022-050974 In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, County of Maricopa.
Personal Auto Insurance Expert Witness
The Personal Auto Policy (PAP) provides much broader coverage than its Commercial Auto counterpart, the Business Auto policy form. To provide coverage remotely as expansive as provided by the PAP, the Business Auto policy would require numerous customized endorsements.
Call (817) 980-4897 to discuss your case.
Broad Coverage with the PAP
Typical PAP coverage forms extend coverage to a broad group of insureds. Various individuals can be considered “insureds” in diverse capacities, and for a wide variety of claim circumstances. For example, coverage for the use of borrowed, hired, and non-owned vehicles is expansive under the PAP. PAP Uninsured Motorist Coverage is also an important consideration, given that an estimated one in four drivers nationwide is an Uninsured Motorist with NO liability insurance.
Potential Shortcomings of PAP Coverage
Although the PAP provides more liberal coverage terms than Commercial Auto policy forms, it is not without its problem areas. The following items can potentially create disputes among insureds, agents, and carriers:
- Named Insured may not match the vehicle title.
- The insured may not have adequate liability limits (see Personal Umbrella policy).
- An agent may fail to adequately explain coverage limitations to the insured.
- A clerical error may occur in adding/deleting vehicles.
- The insured or agent may fail to disclose material information.
- Claims may not be reported promptly.
- Named Driver exclusions (i.e. PP N 003 05 04) can be an issue, as can
- Non-standard Surplus Lines policies.
Personal Auto Insurance Expert Witness Cases
Engaged by plaintiff counsel as a consulting expert to evaluate Personal Auto Policy coverage issues following a fatality traffic accident and carrier’s refusal to open a claim. Attorney Eric Edwardson, (409) 924-0845. Rogers v. Allstate, Civil Action No. 4:21-cv-03118 In United States District Court For The Southern District of Texas Houston Division.
Retained as Personal Auto & Insurance Bad Faith Expert by carrier’s counsel defending Stowers Doctrine allegations. Auto accident involved injuries to multiple parties who asserted claims, resulted in hospital liens and unreasonable Stowers demand deadlines. Case required analysis of insurance industry claims handling custom and practice standards. Attorneys Kurt Paxson and Garrett Yancey, Mounce, Green, Myers, Safi, Paxson & Galatzan PC, (915) 532-2000. Romero v. Mid-Century Insurance Co., Cause No. 2015-DCV3394 In 448th Judicial District Court of El Paso County, Texas.
Designated as an Arbitrator in a carrier dispute with its Managing General Agency / Third Party Administrator relative to a Personal Auto program. Case involved analysis of underwriting criteria, claims handling custom and practice and allegations of Insurance Agent Errors and Omissions. Attorney Dan Vana, Benjamin, Vana, Martinez & Biggs LLP (210) 881-0667. National Unity Insurance Company, Petitioner, v. Tejas Seguros, LLC, Respondent; Proceeding in Arbitration
Engaged by plaintiff counsel as consulting expert to evaluate Agent Errors and Omissions issues relative to Uninsured Motorist bad faith claims handling. Dispute resulted from a motorcycle rider being seriously injured after agent’s failure to procure Personal Auto coverage. Fry v. Colorado Insurance Advisors, Progressive Insurance, et al; Case No. C2017CV30290, Larimer County District Court, State of Colorado, Division 4A. Attorney Phillip Chupik, Metier Law Firm LLC (970) 377-3800.
Engaged by carrier’s defense counsel to evaluate Notice of Cancellation issues for a Personal Auto policy. Petition included allegations of Insurance Bad Faith claims handling for claim denial after a policy cancelled for nonpayment. Attorneys Dawn Goeres and Tom Cooper, Pignato, Cooper, Kolker & Roberson, P.C. (405) 606-3333. Petro v. American Mercury, Case No. CJ-2016-33 In The District Court of Rogers County, Oklahoma.
Engaged by plaintiff counsel to evaluate coverage under Farm & Ranch, Personal Auto, Commercial Auto (Garage Liability) and Commercial Umbrella policies. Dispute resulted from an off-road vehicle fatality with issues of “Who is an Insured” under Personal Auto and Farm & Ranch policies, and whether garage repairs contributed to the accident. Chambers v. Harris, et al; Case No. C201400035 In The District Court Johnson County, Texas, 413th Judicial District. Attorney Dwain Dent, The Dent Law Firm (817) 332-2889.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to analyze issues of Insurance Bad Faith claims handling practices relative to Personal Injury Protection coverage under a Personal Auto policy. Attorney Thomas Friedberg, Law Offices of Friedberg & Bunge (619) 557-0101. Schoenfeld v. USAA, Case No. 37-2013-00045246-CU-IC-CTL, Superior Court of The State Of California In And For the County Of San Diego, Central Judicial District.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to evaluate the contrast between Personal Auto and Commercial Auto policy language. Case required analysis of “who is an insured” wording and coverage for Hired and Nonowned Autos under a Business-owners Policy. Attorney Don Murphy, Murphy & Pressentin LLC, (866) 230-2282. Stone v. Supertino; Case No. S-1500-CV-278310 LHB, Superior Court of the State of California, For the County of Kern
Designated as Insurance Bad Faith and Personal Auto Expert by carrier’s attorney defending Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist coverage claim denial. Case required analysis of carrier underwriting and claims handling practices. Attorney Rick Lyde, Vidaurri, Lyde, Rodriguez & Haynes, L.L.P. (956) 381-6602. Villarreal v. Fred Loya Insurance Agency, Inc.; Cause No. 2011-DCL-8586, In The 444th Judicial District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.
Engaged by counsel for third party as their as Insurance Bad Faith and Personal Auto Expert to provide pre-litigation analysis. Case involved cancellation and rewrite of existing PAP coverage contemporaneous with injured passenger seeking coverage for injuries from an auto accident. Farwell v. American Family Insurance; Attorney Don Murphy, Murphy & Pressentin, (866) 230-2282.
Designated as Insurance Bad Faith and Personal Auto Expert by attorney for policyholder seeking payment under Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist coverage. Case required analysis of carrier claims handling practices regarding prompt claim settlement. Attorney Brad Johnson (702) 222-4145, Kravitz, Schnitzer, Sloane & Johnson, Jordan v. GEICO; Case No. A-10-627758-C, Dept No. XIX; In The Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County, Nevada.
Engaged by carrier’s defense counsel to analyze Non-standard Personal Auto coverage following denial of a claim. Pleadings included allegations of Insurance Bad Faith regarding claims handling practices. Cardenas v. Loya Insurance Company, Cause No.. 2010-CCL-00247-A In The County Court at Law No. 1, Cameron County, Texas. Attorney Rick Lyde, Vidaurri, Lyde, Rodriguez, & Haynes, LLP (956) 381-6602.
Engaged by counsel for policyholder to analyze Personal Auto coverage issues relative to Personal Injury Protection. Case included allegations of Insurance Bad Faith Expert related to claims handling practices of the carrier. Synodis v. Allstate, et al; Case No. A573297 in District Court Clark County, Nevada. Attorney David Boehrer, Richard Harris Law Firm , (702) 385-1400.
Engaged by policyholder’s counsel to provide analysis and testimony regarding Personal Auto and Agent Standard of Care. Case included failure to procure insurance issues. Garza v. U.S. Auto Insurance Services, Inc., et al; Cause No. 2007-CI-00169; Bexar County, TX. Counsel for plaintiff, Richard Silvas, The Silvas Law firm, San Antonio, TX (210)680-2800.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to provide analysis and testimony regarding Commercial Auto and Agent Standard of Care in structuring Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist coverage. Case also included technical coverage issues involving Personal Auto. Creative Young Minds, et al v. Hibbs Hallmark; Cause No. 048-23087-09 in 48th Judicial District Court, Tarrant County, Texas. Attorney Greg Clift, Clouse Dunn Khoshbin LLP (214) 220-3888.
Designated by plaintiff counsel as their Personal Auto and Personal Umbrella expert . Case involved Agent Errors & Omissions regarding failure to place Personal Umbrella insurance. McCulloch v. Woods Insurance Agency, et al; Cause No. 2008-1550-1 in State Court, County of San Juan, NM. Attorney Greg Steinman, Madison, Harbour and Mroz, (505) 242-2177.
Expert designation regarding Personal Auto and agent failure to offer Personal Umbrella insurance. Case involved allegations of Agent Errors & Omissions & Insurance Bad Faith after an auto accident resulted in an uninsured multi-million dollar liability award. Currier v. Woodstock Insurance; Docket No. 587-9-07 Wrcv, Windsor Superior Court, SS., Windsor County, VT. Plaintiff counsel Skip Campbell, Krupnick Campbell Attorneys, (954) 712-8608
Retained as Personal Auto & Insurance Bad Faith Expert by counsel for plaintiff. Stowers doctrine was applied after improper denial of an auto liability claim. Central to this litigation was a question of fact regarding a Texas 515a Driver Exclusion Endorsement. Attorney Jim Essman – Shafer, Davis, O’Leary & Stoker Odessa, TX (432) 332-0893. White v. State Farm; Cause #MO-06-108, United States District Court, Western District of Texas.