Merry Christmas - You Have Been Served!

[AZDave]

Was served a subpoena yesterday. Been in the business for 30 years and this is my first one. They say, if your in this business long enough, it's not a matter of If, just When.

They are asking for the 'entire file' on a policyholder. Including ALL: applications, notes, decs, communications, claim histories, coi's. It was served from the claimants attorney on a loss dated in 2013. All I can figure is they are fishing for coverage.

Details of loss: I carry the cgl on a one man contractor. I also insure 4 rentals. While driving his truck to a job, he ran a stop sign, t boned another car. Full size pick up vs small prius, drivers side impact. Fatality. USAA carries his personal lines.

Prior to the loss, he was very happy with USAA and their low rates. I never quoted it or looked at it: didn't want to waste my time. They are impossible to beat here in AZ. I wish I would have looked at it: he only carried 50/100.

Day of the claim, I have notes about a phone call with insured and my csr. He wanted to know how much more to add non owned auto coverage to the cgl.

Couple days later, I have similar discussion with insured. Then he tells me about the claim. Holly crap. I put the cgl carrier on notice and got the hell out of the way. The carrier immediately denied the loss, as expected.

Nervous energy as I began looking at my file. All looks good to me: signed apps, copies of quotes, annual reviews and a signed coverage checklist at time of application - one of the items on the checklist was non owned auto.

I don't believe non owned auto would have responded here....not sure. Maybe it would since it's AZ and it involves a dead guy.

Any of you been subpeona'd?

At least they are paying us a whopping .25c/copy and $25/hour....it's been 24 hours now, and I'm still 'working' on this!

 

[xrac]

They are just fishing. Doesn't sound like they will have anything.

 

[djs]

Non-owned auto doesn't come into play at all here.... Hmmm, well, who owned the truck? Him or the company? Actually, still wouldn't matter since non-owned auto covers incidental usage, usually. This sounds more like routine usage and as such, would have had to be listed on the policy for coverage.

USAA won't cover since its business use. Okay, maybe they will, but they have an out most likely, if they choose to exercise it. Unless of course, if he had business use on his policy.

This is a normal fishing expedition where an attorney is looking for a way to make money. In fairness, the family is probably due more then the $50K so its not all bad to look for additional coverage.

I've had a few clients sue carriers (and win) but in about 3 cases I know of, not a one involved me.... except I had to deliver the settlement check on one of the cases. The carrier was right in that case, but still lost in court. Ended up being an $8K settlement. It just involved theft of property (long story, but the property was given away, not stolen, and was recovered).

 

[AZDave]

Policy titled in individual name. Pretty sure USAA paid policy limits in a hurry. I have never seen USAA policies with limits lower than 100/300. Insured may have a case against them for failure to offer. I got a feeling he's going to be making a payment to this family's estate for a long time.

I'm sure claimants attorney would love to discover a business auto policy with $1,000,000 limits.

Seems were all just a phone call away from this.

 

[insurance1822]

I just got my 3rd supeoina a few weeks ago. I was scared to death. Fortunately all my applications were Esigned so I was safe. There was an unlicensed kid who was living at college and got hit by a car while walking. The parents never added him because he didn't have a license didn't drive their cars and didn't live with them. The Safeco claims rep was asking for signed apps. Couldn't find them in my files which is why I was scared to death only after researching my emails that I realize it had been Esigned the whole time. Safeco cut a 100k check for UIM within days. This happened 18 months ago too. Overall it rattled my nerves and I was definitely scared shitless. I'm sure it won't be the last time but in that moment I considered getting out of this business because of the inevitable liabilities

Ever since then I'm a hell of a lot more diligent about what I do. I now have so much to lose with my agency and my income that these occurrences are bone chilling. It's almost paralyzing writing new business when you're 100% by the book and worried about CYA all the time.

 

[Indiana_Adam]

That's terrifying. I hope it all goes well. I agree with DJS, non-owned most likely wouldn't be a factor due to being a daily driver. I believe most companies also require certain underlying limits, which most likely were not reached with just 50/100. Our agency is buckling down in getting signed letters stating a client opted not to take coverages we recommend such as comm. auto, wc, higher limits, and etc.

Wish you luck!

 

[marindependent]

Wow what a way to kick off the Holidays. So SOrry

 

[AZDave]

I thought this subpoena was from the dead claimants attorney - wrong. The subpoena is from my insured's attorney! Now I had to put my E & O carrier on notice, which triggers an attorney review of 'the file'. Ughh. Today I don't like insurance.

 

[insurance1822]

^^^^whoa wtf!!! What's up w/ that? scum bag insured trying to backtrack and find money. I wish him the worst.

 

[VaDwayne]

Non-owned auto doesn't come into play at all here.... Hmmm, well, who owned the truck? Him or the company? Actually, still wouldn't matter since non-owned auto covers incidental usage, usually. This sounds more like routine usage and as such, would have had to be listed on the policy for coverage.

USAA won't cover since its business use. Okay, maybe they will, but they have an out most likely, if they choose to exercise it. Unless of course, if he had business use on his policy.

This is a normal fishing expedition where an attorney is looking for a way to make money. In fairness, the family is probably due more then the $50K so its not all bad to look for additional coverage.

I've had a few clients sue carriers (and win) but in about 3 cases I know of, not a one involved me.... except I had to deliver the settlement check on one of the cases. The carrier was right in that case, but still lost in court. Ended up being an $8K settlement. It just involved theft of property (long story, but the property was given away, not stolen, and was recovered).

"Actually, still wouldn't matter since non-owned auto covers incidental usage, usually."

I agree with you on this one