BAD FAITH CLAIM SURVIVES SUMMARY JUDGMENT WHERE INSURER ALLEGEDLY DID NOT KNOW BASIS OF ITS EXPERT’S ESTIMATES (Middle District)
In this property loss case arising from a home fire, the insurer’s public adjuster estimated personal property damages at over $220,000. The insurer’s various experts estimated the personal property losses at approximately $51,000.
The insurer’s claim handler relied upon two vendors, one to inventory the lost property and the other to value the items inventoried. The claim handler concluded that the public adjuster’s inventory and photographs did not justify the $220,000 claim, so he adhered to the results of the insurer’s expert vendors.
The insured brought claims for breach of contract and bad faith, and the insurer moved for summary judgment on the bad faith claim.
The court denied summary judgment. It found the following facts in the record supported a potential bad faith claim:
The insureds offered evidence the insurer’s claim handler did not know how his valuation expert obtained the price and depreciation schedules in the lower estimate.
The insurer’s proof of loss requirements for the burned items was “significantly burdensome.”
The insurer’s adjuster failed to send a proof of loss.
Taking these facts in the light most favorable to the insureds, the court concluded they may show the insurer knew there was no reasonable basis for failing to increase its value estimate, or recklessly disregarded the absence of a reasonable basis to do so.
Date of Decision: June 20, 2019
Obelkevich v. Safeco Insurance Co., U. S. District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania No. 3:18cv1111, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103177 (M.D. Pa. June 20, 2019) (Munley, J.)
