Playback speed
×
Share post
Share post at current time
0:00
/
0:00
Transcript

Fail to Read the Policy at Your Peril

Insurance Producer Only Required to Place Insurance Ordered

Share

Leave a comment

Get a group subscription

Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gDmS4weG and see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gac73xPR and at https://lnkd.in/gc4_Vv28 and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4700 posts.


Post 4747


Never Assume You Are Covered


Five Waters Properties, LLC, appealed the trial court order granting defendants, Mark Bone and Bailey Agency Inc, summary disposition.

In Five Waters Properties, LLC, v. Mark C. Bone and Bailey Agency Inc., No. 366075, Court of Appeals of Michigan (February 22, 2024) the Court of Appeals resolved the dispute.

BASIC FACTS

The failure of the Edenville Dam and subsequent failure of the Sanford Dam in May 2020, resulted in a devastating flood that caused substantial damage to homes and businesses in Midland County, Michigan. Five Waters was one of the businesses affected by the flooding.

Five Waters’ commercial insurance policy was renewed and each year they received correspondence inviting them to schedule a review of Five Waters’ policy. They did not do so.

To establish a prima facie case of negligence, a plaintiff must prove four elements: a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff; a breach of that duty; causation; and damage.

Generally, an insurance agent owes a duty to procure insurance coverage requested by an insured. Because there was no special relationship the Court of Appeal concluded that defendants did not have a duty to advise Five Waters as to the adequacy of its coverage.

The trial court properly granted summary disposition for defendants. The trial court correctly determined that defendants did not owe Five Waters a duty to assess and ensure the adequacy of the business insurance coverage and Five Waters failed to establish a special relationship that gave rise to a duty.

ZALMA OPINION

When insureds suffer a loss that is not covered by the policy they purchased they seem intent on suing the insurance producer who failed to force the insured to purchase a policy that would cover the loss different from the policy they purchased. They sue the insurance producer and find that case law in almost every state only requires the producer to place the insurance required. Although the producer asked the Plaintiff to review their coverages because of potential flood risks they did not until their property was damaged by a flood. Too little too late.

(c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gcZKhG6g

Go to Newsbreak.com https://lnkd.in/g8azKc34

Go to X @bzalma; Go to the podcast Zalma On Insurance at; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://lnkd.in/gV9QJYH; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://lnkd.in/g2hGv88.

Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk

Excellence in Claims Handling
Zalma on Insurance
Blog posts digesting new appellate decisions and free videos about insurance claims and insurance law.