弗吉尼亚汽车保险公司谨慎行事:投保不足的司机承运人在判决前的诚信义务(或缺乏诚信)

Patrick M Hagen
{"title":"弗吉尼亚汽车保险公司谨慎行事:投保不足的司机承运人在判决前的诚信义务(或缺乏诚信)","authors":"Patrick M Hagen","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2997133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The duties of a bodily injury (BI) carrier and an underinsured motorist (UIM) carrier are patently different. The BI carrier has the “duty to defend” and to “exercise good faith,” while the UIM carrier does not have this responsibility. As a result of the inherently different protections of BI coverage and UIM coverage, “[w]hen tort litigation ensues, the liability insurer is the insured’s defender; the [UIM] insurer is the insured’s adversary.” Although the UIM carrier does not have the same obligation in conducting settlement negotiations as the BI carrier, does the UIM carrier have a duty to make a settlement offer to the insured before judgment is entered against the at-fault party? In the past, the UIM carrier’s obligation to make a settlement offer was prompted only by judgment—as opposed to being prompted by the BI carrier’s settlement offer or payment of policy limits to the insured. This Note affords insight into the problem and provides guidance for good faith UIM claims handling.","PeriodicalId":237817,"journal":{"name":"HEN: Insurance (Topic)","volume":"214 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Virginia Auto Insurers Tread Softly: An Underinsured Motorist Carrier's Good Faith Duty (or Lack Thereof) before Judgment\",\"authors\":\"Patrick M Hagen\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2997133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The duties of a bodily injury (BI) carrier and an underinsured motorist (UIM) carrier are patently different. The BI carrier has the “duty to defend” and to “exercise good faith,” while the UIM carrier does not have this responsibility. As a result of the inherently different protections of BI coverage and UIM coverage, “[w]hen tort litigation ensues, the liability insurer is the insured’s defender; the [UIM] insurer is the insured’s adversary.” Although the UIM carrier does not have the same obligation in conducting settlement negotiations as the BI carrier, does the UIM carrier have a duty to make a settlement offer to the insured before judgment is entered against the at-fault party? In the past, the UIM carrier’s obligation to make a settlement offer was prompted only by judgment—as opposed to being prompted by the BI carrier’s settlement offer or payment of policy limits to the insured. This Note affords insight into the problem and provides guidance for good faith UIM claims handling.\",\"PeriodicalId\":237817,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HEN: Insurance (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"214 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HEN: Insurance (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2997133\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HEN: Insurance (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2997133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人身伤害(BI)承运人和未足额保险驾驶员(UIM)承运人的责任明显不同。BI承运人有“防卫义务”和“诚信义务”,而UIM承运人则没有这种责任。由于BI保险和UIM保险的保护本质上不同,“当侵权诉讼发生时,责任保险公司是被保险人的辩护人;(UIM)保险人是被保险人的对手。”虽然UIM承运人没有与BI承运人相同的进行和解谈判的义务,但UIM承运人是否有义务在对过错方作出判决之前向被保险人提出和解要约?在过去,UIM承运人作出和解要约的义务仅仅是由判决引起的,而不是由BI承运人的和解要约或向被保险人支付保单限额引起的。本说明提供了对问题的深入了解,并为真诚地处理UIM索赔提供了指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Virginia Auto Insurers Tread Softly: An Underinsured Motorist Carrier's Good Faith Duty (or Lack Thereof) before Judgment
The duties of a bodily injury (BI) carrier and an underinsured motorist (UIM) carrier are patently different. The BI carrier has the “duty to defend” and to “exercise good faith,” while the UIM carrier does not have this responsibility. As a result of the inherently different protections of BI coverage and UIM coverage, “[w]hen tort litigation ensues, the liability insurer is the insured’s defender; the [UIM] insurer is the insured’s adversary.” Although the UIM carrier does not have the same obligation in conducting settlement negotiations as the BI carrier, does the UIM carrier have a duty to make a settlement offer to the insured before judgment is entered against the at-fault party? In the past, the UIM carrier’s obligation to make a settlement offer was prompted only by judgment—as opposed to being prompted by the BI carrier’s settlement offer or payment of policy limits to the insured. This Note affords insight into the problem and provides guidance for good faith UIM claims handling.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信