389_C062
DID AGENT MISREPRESENT INSURER'S FINANCIAL CONDITION?

Agents And Brokers

Agents' Errors And Omissions

Negligent Misrepresentation

 

On October 28, 1999, Michael Spires' car was struck by a truck operated by James Williams, an employee of Halls of Cross, Inc., a sand and gravel trucking and hauling operation in South Carolina. Spires suffered significant injuries and incurred medical bills of approximately $100,000.

 

Acceleration National Insurance Company insured Halls of Cross. It purchased its Acceleration policy in May 1998 after "shopping" its business among several insurance agencies. One of the agencies was RDR Insurance Specialists, Inc. Bob Royster, an agent for RDR, was unable to obtain insurance with a carrier RDR represented but, through a managing general agency, he eventually located and received a quote from Acceleration. Royster presented this quote to Richard Halls, the owner of Halls of Cross. According to Halls, Royster told him that Acceleration was a good, reliable and sound insurance company. In addition, he claimed he relied upon this representation in making his decision to purchase the insurance from Acceleration.

 

Spires eventually sued Williams and Halls of Cross for damages suffered as a result of the 1999 accident. Although the Acceleration policy was in effect at the time of the accident, Acceleration was unable to provide a defense in the Spires lawsuit because it became insolvent after the policy expired. Instead, the South Carolina Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association assumed the defense.

 

Spire, Williams, Halls of Cross and the Guaranty Association entered into a settlement agreement. Under the agreement, Williams and Halls of Cross agreed to a judgment in favor of Spires in the amount of $1,729,000. This amount was reduced by the amount paid by Spires' insurer and $228,875 paid to Spires by the Guaranty Association. In the agreement, Williams and Halls of Cross also agreed to assign to Spires their rights to any misrepresentation claims against Bob Royster and RDR Insurance.

 

In January 2004, in an attempt to recover the balance of the judgment, Spires filed a negligent misrepresentation and negligence per se action against various parties, including RDR and Royster. In the lawsuit, Spires alleged, among other things, that Royster had falsely represented that Acceleration was "financially solvent and financially sound." According to Spires, at the time the statement was made, Acceleration had been given a "B" rating by A.M. Best, proving that Royster's statement was necessarily false.

 

The U.S. District Court, D. South Carolina, disagreed. According to the court, the only evidence Spires presented to show that Royster made false statements were the depositions of Richard Halls. The court did not find the content of the depositions convincing. According to the depositions, the most Royster had said was that Acceleration was a "sound" insurance company. This statement was not automatically made false by the fact that Acceleration had a "B" A.M. Best rating. In addition, the court noted that an insurance company's Certificate of Authority is evidence of the Department of Insurance's determination that such company is in a sound condition. Acceleration's South Carolina Certificate of Authority was not suspended until 2000. The court concluded that Spires did not prove that Royster made a false statement, an essential element of a cause of action for negligent misrepresentation or negligence per se under South Carolina law.

 

RDR and Royster's motion to dismiss was granted, and the case itself was dismissed.

 

Spires vs. Acceleration National Insurance Company-No. C.A. 9:04-1989-23-United States District Court, D. South Carolina-January 12, 2006-417 Federal Supplement 2d 750

 

(Note: The court's discussion regarding expert testimony was deliberately eliminated from the summary.)