A homeowner’s policy contained two provisions for payments should the house be damaged or destroyed. One provision called for policy limits to be paid upon damage or destruction of the homeowner’s home. By endorsement, the policy called for payment of an additional 50% when the homeowner provided evidence the home was being rebuilt. The insured home was destroyed in a fire and the homeowner filed a claim for the maximum amount due under the policy. The insurance company paid the homeowner the policy’s stated limits. The homeowner began rebuilding his home, and then made a claim on the insurer for the building structure reimbursement provided by endorsement. With evidence of a rebuild, the insurance company paid the homeowner the additional 50% of limits due under the endorsement. The homeowner then sought to collect a punitive money award against the insurance company, claiming the insurance company acted in bad faith by not paying out all amounts due under the insurance policy at the time the homeowner’s home was destroyed. The insurance company claimed they had acted in good faith and were not liable for punitive amounts since they paid the homeowner the full amount due under the policy limit at the time of the home’s destruction and the additional amount when the homeowner provided evidence of a rebuild. A California court of appeals held an insurance company that pays out the amount of the policy limit but not the full amount due under endorsements at the time of destruction of a homeowner’s home is not liable for a punitive money award since insurance policy limits as defined under the insurance code do not require additional coverage by endorsement to be paid out at the time of a property’s destruction. [Minich v. Allstate Insurance Company (2011) 193 CA4th 477]
About The Author
is a past member of the first tuesday Editorial Staff.
July 3, 2012
February 10, 2010
April 13, 2012
July 3, 2014
Most Popular This Week
- Selling to an investor versus an owner-occupant buyer 874 views
- California lawmakers bulldoze promising housing bill 529 views
- California home sales volume lays low 378 views
- Using the yield spread to forecast recessions and recoveries 321 views
- Orange County housing indicators 282 views
- Mortgage lenders call for big changes at the CFPB 273 views
Check out our previous polls here.
- George West I once knew a buyer that just wanted to tie up the property with a sale contract, then twist the seller's arm later. He would... – Selling to an investor versus an owner-occupant buyer
- DAVID BLAKE Seller beware: Many "cash buyers" play the purchase offer game. "Just get them in contract" game. There's not am earnest buyer. The "proof of funds"... – Selling to an investor versus an owner-occupant buyer
- Duke Ashwood Curious if the slow down in China is factored into these numbers. There are huge swaths of Irvine that are nearly 100% Chinese nationals purchasing... – Orange County housing indicators
- Gloria Working in San Diego, speaking to hundreds of people every year about real estate, I have met one person who didn’t care about profit over... – Zillow, Redfin test out full-service model
- Dennis Nice article! – The CalBRE mortgage business activity report
- David rissi Thank you for the article on Redfin and Zillow. I just finished getting my California Real Estate License, CE 45 hour course and was wondering... – Zillow, Redfin test out full-service model
Zestimates are great conversation starters with sellers and buyers. Zillow has done more for our bottom line than NAR ever has or will. Don’t fight the current of the river, learn to run with it. Disruption is inevitable in any industry that is fragmented or inefficient. Granted, it does feel like armchair experts and platforms are plentiful in real estate these days, but when the tide rolls out we will see the value proposition of the truest professionals in this industry shine once again.
– Justin Bonney, on Zillow’s impact on the real estate industry
Get real estate news straight to your email.