Personal Auto Insurance Expert

The Personal Auto Policy (PAP) provides much broader coverage than its Commercial Auto counterpart, the Business Auto policy form.  To provide coverage remotely as expansive as provided by the PAP, the Business Auto policy would require numerous customized endorsements.

Broad Coverage with the PAP

Typical PAP coverage forms extend coverage to a broad group of insureds.   Various individuals can be considered “insureds” in diverse capacities, and for a wide variety of claim circumstances.    For example, coverage for the use of borrowed, hired, and non-owned vehicles is expansive under the PAP.  PAP Uninsured Motorist Coverage is also an important consideration, given that an estimated one in four drivers nationwide is an Uninsured Motorist with NO liability insurance.

Potential Shortcomings of PAP Coverage

Although the PAP provides more liberal coverage terms than Commercial Auto policy forms, it is not without its problem areas.  The following items can potentially create disputes among insureds, agents, and carriers:

We welcome a call to discuss your specific case issues: 817.980.4897.

Cases are listed only after we are disclosed as an Insurance Expert to opposing counsel.

January 2012  – Designated as Insurance Bad Faith and Personal Auto Expert by attorney for policyholder seeking payment under Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist coverage. Case required analysis of carrier claims handling practices regarding prompt claim settlement.  Attorney Brad Johnson (702) 222-4145, Kravitz, Schnitzer, Sloane & Johnson, Jordan v. GEICO; Case No. A-10-627758-C, Dept No. XIX; In The Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County, Nevada.

August 2011 – Engaged by carrier’s defense counsel to analyze Non-standard Personal Auto coverage following denial of a claim.  Pleadings included allegations of Insurance Bad Faith regarding claims handling practices.    Cardenas v. Loya Insurance Company, Cause No.. 2010-CCL-00247-A In The County Court at Law No. 1, Cameron County, Texas.  Attorneys Rick Chavez and Peter Thaddeus, Dietz, Aliseda & Associates, (956) 289-2199.

June 2010 – Engaged by policyholder’s counsel to provide analysis and testimony regarding Personal Auto and Agent Standard of Care.  Case included failure to procure insurance issues. Garza v. U.S. Auto Insurance Services, Inc., et al; Cause No. 2007-CI-00169; Bexar County, TX. Counsel for plaintiff, Richard Silvas, The Silvas Law firm, San Antonio, TX (210)680-2800.

February 2010 - Engaged by policyholder counsel to provide analysis and testimony regarding Commercial Auto and Agent Standard of Care in structuring Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist coverage.  Case also included technical coverage issues involving Personal Auto.  Creative Young Minds, et al v. Hibbs Hallmark; Cause No. 048-23087-09 in 48th Judicial District Court, Tarrant County, Texas.  Attorney Greg Clift, Clouse Dunn Khoshbin LLP  (214) 220-3888.

December 2010 – Engaged by counsel for policyholder to analyze Personal Auto coverage issues relative to Personal Injury Protection. Case included allegations of Insurance Bad Faith Expert related to claims handling practices of the carrier. Synodis v. Allstate, et al; Case No. A573297 in District Court Clark County, Nevada. Attorney David Boehrer, Richard Harris Law Firm , (702) 385-1400.

December 2008  -  Designated by plaintiff counsel as their Personal Auto and Personal Umbrella expert .  Case involved  Agent Errors & Omissions regarding failure to place Personal Umbrella insurance.  McCulloch v. Woods Insurance Agency, et al; Cause  No. 2008-1550-1 in State Court, County of San Juan, NM.  Attorney Greg Steinman, Madison, Harbour and Mroz, (505) 242-2177.

October 2008 - Expert designation regarding Personal Auto and agent failure to offer Personal Umbrella insurance.  Case involved allegations of Agent Errors & Omissions & Insurance Bad Faith after an auto accident resulted in an uninsured multi-million dollar liability award.  Currier v. Woodstock Insurance; Docket No. 587-9-07 Wrcv, Windsor Superior Court, SS., Windsor County, VT.  Plaintiff counsel Skip Campbell, Krupnick Campbell Attorneys, (954) 712-8608

November 2006 - Retained as Personal Auto & Insurance Bad Faith Expert by counsel for plaintiff.   Stowers doctrine was applied after improper denial of an auto liability claim. Central to this litigation was a question of fact regarding a Texas 515a Driver Exclusion Endorsement. Attorney Jim Essman - Shafer, Davis, O'Leary & Stoker Odessa, TX (432) 332-0893. White v. State Farm; Cause #MO-06-108, United States District Court, Western District of Texas.

Return to Top 

Burl Daniel, CPCU, CIC, CRM     |     817.980.4897    |     burl@burldaniel.com