Negligence, Other Injury Proof of Bad Faith in Insurance Claim

Redemptionman

Redemptionman

Well-Known Member
Jurisdiction
Mississippi
This is a general question, anyone have any experience with Bad Faith in first party claims?

I know most do not allow punitive damages and mainly it is a set amount of interest paid on whatever limits it applies to.

Basically what is it you have to prove and the hurdle of proof?
 
Last edited:
It would be better if you tell us what's actually going on rather than ask for a blanket lesson on the matter.
 
Redemptionman said:
This is a general question, anyone have any experience with Bad Faith in first party claims?
Click to expand...

Would it surprise you that I have lots of experience in first party claims where bad faith was alleged?

After all, I am ADJUSTERJACK, the super insurance maven of thelaw.com. :D

Mississippi has not adopted the "Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act" which means that determining "bad faith" would depend on Mississippi Supreme Court case decisions based on specific types of claims and the specific behavior of the company representatives.

I can tell you that, in general, bad faith involves behavior that is egregious, malicious, and/or has no reasonable basis for the behavior.

Now, echoing Zigner, what's happening to you?
 
Which is why I stated generally and yes I know that audacious conduct has to be proven to cause harm to the insured. However, it appears your supreme court appointment would be wrong as it could be found within the jury determination. Now said bad faith insurer has the ability to appeal but generally speaking jury verdicts are the general last word in a case.
 
Redemptionman said:
Which is why I stated generally and yes I know that audacious conduct has to be proven to cause harm to the insured. However, it appears your supreme court appointment would be wrong as it could be found within the jury determination. Now said bad faith insurer has the ability to appeal but generally speaking jury verdicts are the general last word in a case.
Click to expand...

Good luck, perhaps you'll achieve a just result.
 
Redemptionman said:
However, it appears your supreme court appointment would be wrong as it could be found within the jury determination.Generally speaking jury verdicts are the general last word in a case.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, and certainly not generally.

A jury's decision is based on instructions given by the judge. The decision can be appealed based on erroneous instructions. The amount of the award is also subject to appeal. I suppose ineffective counsel could also be grounds.

That an award of punitive damages was included in the jury's decision is, in itself, grounds for appeal.

I sampled a couple of MS case decisions to see if any of them outlined exactly what the elements of bad faith were. Cases were too specific to reveal general rules.

In one case, punitive damages were reversed because they were awarded by the trial jury. The MS Supreme Court made the point that a breach of contract decision was the purview of the jury but the question of punitive damages for bad faith was the subject of a separate evidentiary hearing, not by the jury.

In another case a denial of a claim was ruled not bad faith even though the insurance company lost and the denial was overturned. The court ruled that the insurance company had a reasonable basis for the denial even though the denial was found to be in error, therefore no bad faith.

Rman, I know how you feel about the insurance business. Lately, I've been pretty pissed off at it myself. However, insurance is complex. Mistakes are made and bad faith does occur often. It's important to be able to tell the difference.

I'm always willing to discuss specifics with you.
 
Which is why I said an interest amount on the particular policy limits. Either way I do not understand when these companies act this way they are not allowed to have substantial punitive damages awarded? They are basically making their policy holders contract worthless daring them to go to court to get a judgement. I guess if they win 1 or 2 out of 10 then they some how have saved money. However, more federal prosecutors should be able to bring class action or criminal charges against these companies that make a practice of delaying and denying claims.

Less would do it, several things can lead to bad faith as a rule you have a large hurdle to overcome and again whether or not the Bad Faith occurred is a jury decision. One interesting thing it does is unmask if you will the first party insurer opening them to jury award and damages.
 
adjusterjack said:
You write as if insurance companies never get punished for bad faith. They do. Bad faith judgments cost the industry billions.

See this article from the International Risk Management Institute:

Bad Faith, Litigation Trends, and Emerging Tactics | Expert Commentary | IRMI.com
Click to expand...

I know it...

Would it not just be cheaper for them to pay the claim and move on then to drag it out and get punished in the end anyway?

Makes no sense other than to hurt their insured who more than likely isn't their insured any longer anyway and the contract is not worth the paper it is printed on.
 
As with every human being who walks (has walked) our planet, some are good, some are depraved, and some are just evil.

The principle applies to all entities created by humankind.

Hopefully, the bad ones are caught, taken to task, and justice is served.

I suggest if any person seeking the services or products of any such entity referenced above conduct her/his due diligence before expending one dollar of her/his moola.
 
Redemptionman said:
Would it not just be cheaper for them to pay the claim and move on then to drag it out and get punished in the end anyway?
Click to expand...

Do you advocate paying claims for which there is no coverage?
Paying claims to people who burn down their own buildings?
Arrange to have their cars stolen?
Hire public adjusters who pad the claims by 15% to cover their commission?
Body shops and contractors that pad the estimate to save the deductible?
Pay claims to people who flat out lie on the insurance application?

I don't have an answer for you. If you can figure out how to solve the problem you'll become a very rich person.
 
Yeah well it is a messed up system, and I agree but I am talking about when there is limits in the policy which provides the coverage. I do understand fraud does go on but insurance exist to coverage damages for people who have valid claims.
 
army judge said:
I suggest if any person seeking the services or products of any such entity referenced above conduct her/his due diligence before expending one dollar of her/his moola.
Click to expand...

The general idea is you do not know when a good one or a bad exists till you file a claim. Then you usually see the true colors of an insurance color.
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top