wrh logo  
rule

spacer
Welcome
Attorneys
Practice Areas
Newsletters
Office Location
Legal Information
Clients
Disclaimer
Contact Us
spacer Wood, Ris & Hames, P.C.
1775 Sherman Street
Suite 1600
Denver, CO 80203-4313
Tel. (303) 863-7700
Fax. (303) 830-8772
image

image image
 
  bug      

Bad Faith


Colorado law provides that insurers owe a duty of good faith and fair dealing to their insureds. The duty can arise under first-party and third-party insurance contracts. An insurer breaches this duty when it delays or denies payment without having a reasonable basis for doing so. Generally, insureds owe a similar duty to their insurers.

Elements of Bad Faith Claim – Third Party Contracts

In order to recover on a bad faith claim, the plaintiff-insured must prove that:

  • He or she was injured or damaged;
  • The insurer acted unreasonably;
  • The insurer knew the conduct was unreasonable; and
  • The insurer’s unreasonable conduct caused his or her injuries or damages.
An insurer engages in “unreasonable conduct” when it fails to do something a reasonably careful person would do or acts in a way a reasonably careful person would not under the same or similar circumstances. Colorado law presumes that certain claims unreasonable and thus prohibits them by statute. Statutorily-prohibited claims practices include the following:
  • Misrepresenting pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions relating to coverage;
  • Failing to acknowledge and promptly respond to communications regarding claims;
  • Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the prompt investigation of claims;
  • Refusing to pay claims without conducting a reasonable investigation;
  • Failing to affirm or deny coverage of claims within a reasonable time after proof of loss statements have been completed;
  • Failing to attempt in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of claims where liability is reasonably clear;
  • Compelling insureds to institute litigation to recover amounts due under an insurance policy by offering substantially less than the amounts ultimately recovered in such actions;
  • Attempting to settle a claim for less than the amount to which a reasonable person would have believed he was entitled by reference to written or printed advertising material accompanying an application;
  • Attempting to settle claims on the basis of an application which was altered without notice to, or knowledge or consent of, the insured;
  • Sending claim payments to insureds or their beneficiaries without including a statement setting forth the coverage;
  • Informing insureds or claimants that it is the insurer’s policy to appeal arbitration awards in favor of insureds or claimants to compel them to accept compromises;
  • Delaying investigation or payment of claims by requiring insureds to submit a preliminary claim report followed by a formal proof of loss, both of which request the same information;
  • Failing to promptly settle claims under one portion of the policy to influence settlements under other portions of the policy;
  • Failing to promptly provide a reasonable explanation based on the policy, facts, or law for the insurer’s denial of the claim;
  • Raising comparative negligence as a defense or reason for partial offset in the adjustment of a third-party claim without conducting a reasonable investigation and developing substantial evidence to support the defense.
 

 

 

The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.
Copyright © 2004 by Wood, Ris & Hames, P.C. All rights reserved.
You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution.
All copies must include this copyright statement.

image image image image image
 
image   image
image image
image