Claims and Bad Faith Law Blog

TRAVEL INSURANCE CLAIMS UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: BAD FAITH CLAIMS COMING?

"While travel insurance is becoming more ubiquitous, getting a timely response to a claim remains a challenge."  Elaine Glusac, As Omicron Subsides, Travel Insurance Claims Crawl / An increase in claims has slowed down the vetting and approval process, NEW YORK TIMES, Mon., March 14, 2022, at B2.

          Two developments addressed in this article, and the way they are addressed, signal the likely onset of bad faith claims to come.  First, the article centers on how long it takes for travel insurance claims to be paid.  One of the claims featured in the article "took nearly two months" to get paid, and the article quotes travel agents including one who is quoted with the observation that travel insurance claims "'that typically used to be paid in under two months are now taking as much as five or more months.'"  Elaine Glusac, NEW YORK TIMES, supra.

          Parenthetically, after 44 years of handling insurance bad faith claims my reaction to a claim taking two to five months to get paid is that those claims are actually getting paid pretty fast.  But perception is everything, and if the prevailing perception of policyholders and travel agents and brokers of travel insurance policies is that travel insurance claims are slow getting paid, then insurance bad faith claims will likely not be very long in coming.

          The second development reported in this article is that many players in the travel industry are arranging for travel insurance or are offering it themselves.  The Marriott hotel conglomerate is an example of arranging travel insurance for their customers; the article reports that in January 2022,  "Marriott hotels teamed up with the insurer Allianz to offer travel insurance."  Elaine Glusac, NEW YORK TIMES, supra.  As an example of travel-related companies offering travel insurance themselves, the article mentions that Airbnb has plans to do so.

          All in all, then, given the expanding use of travel insurance especially in a pandemic and given the apparent public perception that it is taking too long to pay travel insurance claims, bad faith claims are not far away.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2022 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

Attorney's Fees and Sanctionable Costs: The Overlooked Expenses of Bad Faith.

   In a recent Report and Recommendation in a Bad Faith Case, a U.S. Magistrate Judge in North Florida assessed reasonable attorney fee rates prevailing in Miami:  B-K Cypress Log Homes Inc. v. Auto-Owners Insurance Co., 2011 WL 6151507 (N.D. Fla. Report and Recommendation November 1, 2011), Download B-K Cypress Log Homes Inc. v. Auto-Owners Insurance Co. (N.D. Fla. Case No. 1.09cv00211, Report and Recommendation Nov. 1, 2011) PUBLIC ACCESS, and in addition recommended certain unreimbursable costs as sanctions.

   In fact, the entire award was really an assessment of sanctions against the Defendant's attorneys for what the District Court described as the attorneys participation in discovery violations.  The Defendant itself was sanctioned by the striking of its answer and affirmative defenses, followed by a default judgment on the issue of liability in this Bad Faith Case.

   The Magistrate Judge first reported that reasonable attorney fee rates for a partner-level attorney in Bad Faith Cases in Miami, Florida, which would be awarded in Gainesville, Florida where this report was made, were $450.00 an hour in 2010 and $475.00 an hour in 2011.  Id. at *2.

  Next, the reasonable hourly rates "for a first or second year associate practicing in Miami, Florida" [emphasis added],  particularly in a "law firm that specializes -- almost exclusively" in Bad Faith Cases, was $195.00 an hour in 2010 and $210.00 an hour in 2011.  Id. at *2.

   Third, Paralegal Rates for a Paralegal at the same law firm would reasonably be $125.00 an hour for someone who was "a law librarian for eleven years prior to becoming a Florida registered paralegal" with 18 years of Paralegal experience, and $100.00 an hour for a Paralegal whose "training or experience" was not supported by any evidence at all.  Id. at *3.

   Finally, the Magistrate Judge noted that although "reimbursement of travel costs" is not taxable to a prevailing party in Federal Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, still such costs are awardable as sanctions.  In this case, therefore, the Magistrate Judge recommended that "travel from Miami to Gainesville to attend hearings on their motions to compel and for sanctions" were "accordingly ... reasonable expenses related to obtaining discovery from defendant."  Id. at *4.

   The U.S. Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations in this case were approved and accepted by the U.S. District Judge, 2011 WL 6150282 (N.D. Fla., December 12, 2011)(Rogers, Chief Judge).

   The United States District Judge expressly ruled in this Order:  "Pursuant to the order imposing sanctions (doc. 106), defendant's counsel of record is required to satisfy personally the plaintiff's reasonable costs and attorney's fees."  Id. at *1 n.2.

Please Read The Disclaimer.