In Progressive American Insurance Company v. Gregory, Inc. (3D08-2238), the Third District reversed a grant of summary judgment because disputed issues of fact exist. The court stated:
Section 627.727 of the Florida Statutes expressly provides that no motor vehicle policy for bodily injury coverage may be written in this state without also providing UM coverage, unless a written rejection of such coverage has been provided...While these facts confirm that Lon Worth violated the provisions of its agency agreement with Progressive, an issue remains as to whether Progressive sustained any injury as a consequence of that breach...This issue turns on whether Goff, the insured, did or did not want UM coverage. If he did, then Progressive suffered no harm as a consequence of Lon Worth’s breach; that is, Progressive incurred no harm flowing from Lon Worth’s failure to either secure a UM waiver or to advise Progressive that it had no UM waiver. If, however, Goff did not want UM coverage or decided after learning of its cost not to take it, then Progressive was injured because of Lon Worth’s failure to secure a UM waiver from Goff...We agree with Progressive that a factual dispute exists on this issue. As Progressive points out, a UM form was sent to Goff along with an application for motorcycle insurance on October 5, 1995. That form gave Goff the option to either reject UM coverage entirely or to select UM coverage at an amount less than the bodily injury liability limits of the policy. However, had Goff, as both he and Lon Worth claim, always wanted full UM coverage, there would have been no need to include this UM form in the application package.
0 comments:
Post a Comment