fbpx

ACCC Insurance Company UM/UIM Auto Coverage Mississippi Class Action

Unfortunately, people often find out what an insurance policy does and does not cover only after an incident has occurred and payment is required. The complaint for this class action claims that ACCC Insurance Company did not provide the uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage required by Mississippi state law.

The class for this action is all insureds under policies issued or delivered in Mississippi by ACCC Insurance Company in which UM/UIM coverage was denied based on the Family Member/Resident Exclusion found in the policies.

Plaintiff Melvin Fairman was a passenger in his wife’s car on May 26, 2015 when they saw dogs in the road. Fairman’s wife swerved to avoid the dogs but ended up going off the road and hitting a tree stump. The car overturned several times, and Fairman was injured.

Fairman’s wife had auto insurance through ACCC and he was a Class I insured under the policy. However, when he tried to make a claim for his injuries, he was denied coverage under both the liability and the UM/UIM provisions. ACCC also did not pay him anything under the policy’s Medical Payments provision.

ACCC denied the coverage because it claimed that the UM provision excluded family members and residents of the insured as “covered persons” for UM purposes if they were not named on the declarations page or added by endorsement. However, the policies do provide for coverage for any “other person occupying your covered auto the express permission.”

However, the complaint claims that Mississippi state law requires that all auto insurance policies provide UM/UIM coverage to all insureds unless there is a valid written rejection of the coverage. The written rejections must be in writing on a form approved by the Mississippi Department of Insurance. The complaint says that no such form was ever executed.

Also, Mississippi state law defines an “insured,” for the purposes of UM/UIM coverage as “[t]he named insured and, while resident of the same household, the spouse of any such named insured” and “a guest in such motor vehicle to which the policy applies…”

The complaint quotes previous court cases, including a Mississippi Supreme Court decision that stated that it “has consistently held that an insurer may not diminish the mandated statutory requirements.” In another, the same court held that an auto insurance policy may provide greater UM coverage than that required by law, but it may not provide less. And a US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi found that a policy restricting UM coverage to certain designated individuals was invalid and a violation of law because the definition of “insured” was narrower than the statutory definition.

The complaint alleges breach of contract and tortious breach of contract, among other things.

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer

Most Recent Case Event

ACCC Insurance Company UM/UIM Auto Coverage Mississippi Complaint

September 11, 2018

Unfortunately, people often find out what an insurance policy does and does not cover only after an incident has occurred and payment is required. The complaint for this class action claims that ACCC Insurance Company did not provide the uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage required by Mississippi state law. 

accc_insurance_uninsured_complaint.pdf

Case Event History

ACCC Insurance Company UM/UIM Auto Coverage Mississippi Complaint

September 11, 2018

Unfortunately, people often find out what an insurance policy does and does not cover only after an incident has occurred and payment is required. The complaint for this class action claims that ACCC Insurance Company did not provide the uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage required by Mississippi state law. 

accc_insurance_uninsured_complaint.pdf
Tags: Auto Insurance, Coverage Denial, Deceptive Insurance Practices