skip to Main Content

INSURANCE LAW: Superior Court holds that an alleged inadequate offer to settle UM claim can provide a basis for CUIPA liability

INSURANCE LAW: Superior Court Holds That An Alleged Inadequate Offer To Settle UM Claim Can Provide A Basis For CUIPA Liability

The Superior Court grants a motion to strike a bad faith claim but denies the motion to strike as to a claim pursuant to the Connecticut Unfair Insurances Practices Act where it was alleged that the plaintiff had undergone arthroscopic surgery and had medical expenses in excess of $25,000.00, as well as an inability to work and lost wages but where the insurer offered to settle for $12,500.00 where the UM limit was $100,000.00.

The insurer has requested a medical authorization to obtain medical records, and the plaintiff apparently refused to provide that.  The Court strikes a count for bad faith based on an allegation of an intentional refusal to negotiate since there was no allegation to support a claim of dishonest motive or moral obliquity;  however, the Court allows the CUIPA claim to stand based upon allegations that the insurer failed to effectuate a fair, prompt and equitable settlement and did not provide a reasonable explanation of the basis in the insurance policy for the denial of the plaintiff’s claims.

Canino v. Peerless Ins. Co.,  CV 13-6043986-S (Huddleston, J.)(Jan. 15, 2014)