On Oct. 16, yet another class action was filed against an insurer in Kentucky, this one based on an alleged failure to disclose available household coverages. Stinson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., Jefferson Circuit Court (removed to the Western District of Kentucky, Case no. 3:18-cv-00752-DJH). In Stinson, the insured claimed agents forged signatures on UM/UIM rejection forms without insureds' consent and engaged in other conduct relating to rejection of UM/UIM coverages.
However, the core of the claims alleges a systemic failure with first-party claims to disclose household coverages available under other policies. The insurer issues policies by vehicle rather than by household. The insured alleges that claims are opened under the policy relating to the vehicle at issue, and that because of how policy information is stored, there is a scheme to preclude finding other policies in the same household with available coverage, and that other household policies are not disclosed to claims personnel. The insured alleges a class of Kentucky residents who were injured in an accident that was the fault of another and were not provided information on all available coverages.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.