Tropical Storm Warning Issued For Texas  June 18th 2024

GEICO STD-from-car claim rolls on in court

Remember the case involving GEICO and a claimant seeking to be compensated after allegedly contracting a sexually transmitted disease in a policyholder’s car? Well, you will be mistaken if you think that claim is already done and dusted. On further contest, the case is being heard by a three-judge panel on the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Previous decisions on the unusual case, which began in 2021, include rulings in favor of both sides. GEICO, which was formerly ordered to compensate the woman (identified only as M.O.), was successful in getting that judgment overturned.

M.O., who had initially sought $1 million but was awarded $5.2 million by a Missouri arbitrator, now wants US Circuit Judges Steven Colloton, Michael Melloy, and Raymond Gruenderto rule back in her favor, arguing against the supposed ambiguity of the GEICO policy and insisting that her claim falls under the bodily injury cover provided by the car insurance.

For GEICO’s camp, however, the automobile insurance policy only applies when the vehicle is used for “vehicular purposes,” suggesting that a car romp isn’t one of them.

As such, during a recent hearing, one argument was on whether “normal use of an auto” is ambiguous enough to get M.O. paid.

A judge asked: “It’s foreseeable that people are going to have sex in the car – I mean, that’s clearly foreseeable, right?”

Second USAA policyholder lawsuit over fees moves forward

After the United Services Automobile Association and its subsidiaries agreed to reimburse thousands of policyholders more than $8 million for inappropriately assessed late fees, a federal judge in Maryland is now allowing a separate matter to proceed, in which policyholders seek more than $7 million worth of interest on those improperly retained charges.

U.S. District Judge Peter J. Messitte of the District of Maryland denied USAA's motion to dismiss plaintiff Walter Black III's claims for money had and received and unjust enrichment, ruling the plaintiff pleaded facts clearly to suggest USAA "knew full well that they had the use of the late fees," and "they understood the time-value of the fees" and their interest-bearing potential, according to a June 11 opinion.

Messitte also denied most of USAA's motion to dismiss regarding its statute of limitations and failure to state a claim argument, and said that the court is prepared to entertain a motion to certify an appropriate class or classes.

Black filed suit against USAA and its subsidiaries, Garrison Property and Casualty Insurance Co., USAA General Indemnity Co., and USAA Casualty Insurance Co., after USAA improperly charged him three $10 late charge fees for untimely payment on his monthly premiums between 2013 and 2014.

USAA lacked authority to charge the late fees because it failed to receive approval from the Maryland Insurance Administration (MIA) and the Maryland Insurance Commissioner (MIC), as is required by state insurance administration regulations, the opinion said.

A 2020 investigation by the MIC resulted in USAA entering into a consent order agreeing to reimburse 130,000 policyholders in excess of $8.1 million for inappropriately charging customers late fees. Black received a credit to his account for $30 for the late charges. However, he did not receive interest the defendants earned over the years on the charges, leading him to file the current putative class action, seeking the interest on the improperly retained late charges — in excess of $7 million.

Nationwide drops pet insurance for 100,000 policyholders

Nationwide Insurance said it will not renew about 100,000 pet insurance policies because of a rise in inflation in veterinary care and other factors.

Christie Keith has been paying $600 a month in pet insurance premiums to insure her dogs for years and bumped that up to more than $700 recently to add coverage for her 4-year-old Silkan Windhound, Pip.

But a few weeks ago, the protection plan for her pets came unraveled when Nationwide Insurance announced it would cancel coverage for about 100,000 pets across the country, blaming the rising costs of veterinary care and other factors that are cutting into the profits of its pet insurance business, the company said in a statement on June 14.

The move is leaving tens of thousands of pet owners in a predicament, because – even though Nationwide says age and prior claims history aren't a factor – many of those policies are for older pets with pre-existing conditions that may not be insurable elsewhere.

For Keith, a 65-year-old freelance writer who lives in Davisburg, Michigan, the dilemma is especially troubling because her older dogs have both needed medical treatment recently. Ros, a 10-year-old Silken Windhound, has been hospitalized twice and continues to suffer from an undiagnosed illness, while Harper, an 8-year-old Scottish Deerhound, has been treated for a back injury.

Ros, a 10-year-old Silken Windhound, which has been hospitalized twice and continues to suffer from an undiagnosed illness, may not have insurance coverage after April 2025, when a current policy expires. Nationwide won't renew the coverage, pet owner Christie Keith of Davisburg, Mich., said.

She began paying Nationwide for coverage for Harper in November 2017 and Ros in April 2021. Keith insured Pip, a 4-year-old Silken Windhound, in December 2023. Nationwide told Keith the policies for her dogs would expire as the renewal dates hit and that she couldn't get lesser policies from them for her dogs.