Insurance Claims in Hawaii
Claims v. Insurers - Generally
There are various types of insurance coverage related to personal injury
accident claims. For an overview of the types of coverage, please click here:
Types of insurance coverage
After an accident it is usually very important
(from the point of view of making a claim) to take a number
of steps immediately in order to preserve evidence and document your claims.
To examine these issues more closely, please visit the following page:
Inital Steps in Making Your Claim.
If you wish to examine the
minimum insurance coverages required under
Hawaii state law for most motor vehicles
and for motorcycles then you can do
so at the following two links:
Auto Accidents and Motor Vehicle Insurance for Car Accidents
Motorcycle Accidents and Insurance on Motorcycles
These coverages
generally should be available to help to compensate
a person for loss as the result of negligent operation
of the vehicle. (Optional additional coverages may also be available.)
Insurance
Company Bad Faith in Hawaii
Sometimes when dealing with an insurance company, a claimant
is treated so badly that the wrongful conduct gives rise to
an independent cause of action for insurance company bad faith.
Insurance
policies are generally purchased by policy holders to bring
peace of mind and security. They are supposed to provide
"good neighbors" and "good hands" in
time of need. Increasingly, however, insurance companies
take the approach that they are profit machines for their
stockholders and insiders. Claims adjusters are taught to
be difficult to reach, uncooperative when finally tracked
down and evasive in their responses.
Claim payment is often avoided on the thinnest of excuses-
with an eye toward forcing a financially weakened claimant
into a position of economic desperation and obtaining a settlement
which favors the insurance company. Such tactics are
very common- but in an appropriate case they may give
rise to an independent cause of action for bad faith.
In a bad faith action- a claimant has the benefit of being able to
identify for the jury the insurance company that is mistreating its policy-holder
or beneficiary. As a general rule- claimants are precluded by the Hawaii rules of evidence
from discussing insurance companies in any way during the trial of a liability insurance
claim. This unfortunate situation allows liability insurers to conduct
outrageous character assasination against opposing
litigants while having their profit motive for such bald-faced
smear campaigns obscured from the inquiring minds of jurors. In order to change this
unjust situation, prompt legislative or judicial reversal
of this unfair situation is required. Such deliberate and
unethical conduct by insurance companies should not continue under
a cloak of darkness granted because insurance companies are
rich and politically powerful. However, in a bad faith action-
as opposed to most liability claims- the claimant is able to
identify and expose the wrongdoing of the insurance company.
The
decision of the Hawaii Supreme Court in The Best
Place, Inc. v. Penn America Insurance Co. (Hi Sup Ct No.
16065, June 5, 1996) upheld claims for bad faith conduct
against insurance companies under Hawaii law. When an insurer
wrongfully denies benefits, the insurer may held liable
for consequential damages, emotional distress damages, punative
damages, attorneys fees and more. Although this decision
found only that the insurer is liable for bad faith conduct
toward a person who paid it for insurance coverage, the
reasoning followed by the court indicates that the Hawaii
courts may also recognize insurer responsibility for bad
faith conduct in other situations in the future. The court
referred to an implied covenant of "good faith and
fair dealing".
When addressing the issue of bad faith on the part of an insurance company
one Oregon case was rather specific about the requirements placed on an
insurance company. In the case of Radcliffe v. Franklin National Insurance Company
of New York, 298 P.2d 1002 (Or.1956) at 1020, that court stated:
"it can not be said to be bad faith to deny a claim when there is
substantial evidence to support the denial. ...the minimum requirement is
that the insurer must exercise good faith in disposing of settlement
matters. We do not believe that an insurer displays good faith unless it
gives consideration to the interests of the insured. Good faith may
frequently be determined by ascertaining whose interest was deemed
paramount, the insured's or the insurer's, when the insurance company
rejected an offer of settlement; in other words, whose interest was
sacrificed at that time. We have taken note of the fact that a conflict of
interest between the insured and the insurer presents itself when damages
are sought in excess of the policy limits and an offer of settlement which
approximates the policy limit is received.
|