by Mike of the Ozarks » Tue Mar 11, 2008 03:06 pm
If anyone is familliar with E&O policy on an automobile insurance agent, give me your opinion.
If an agent makes a libelous or slanderous accusation about a small business to discourage one of their insureds from using that business, can the agent be sued under their E&O. If you have an affidavit from the insured of the agent that verifies the remarks but still contracts with the business, there is no damage thus no tortious interference of business.
An attorney suggested this as a recourse against the defamatory comments.
If an agent makes a libelous or slanderous accusation about a small business to discourage one of their insureds from using that business, can the agent be sued under their E&O. If you have an affidavit from the insured of the agent that verifies the remarks but still contracts with the business, there is no damage thus no tortious interference of business.
An attorney suggested this as a recourse against the defamatory comments.
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 03:42 pm Post Subject:
As far as I know, an E&O policy is there to protect the agent against claims brought against him for mistakes or errors made involving his insured's.
Libel, slander and defamation are forms of personal injury. Personal injury claims are very hard to prove since the agent may have tried to persuade the insured not to use them because of past experience he or his insureds have had with the company.
Now, if he had done this in an attempt to steer the insured to a company of his choice, he may have some issues. And not just with the company he defamed.
It's very hard to prove these personal injuries but it may be worth at least discussing it with an attorney to see what options are available. I don't beleive E&O is the coverage that will protect the agent in this situation.
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 09:05 pm Post Subject:
I agree MB it is my understanding (and have seen a few claims) that E&O policys cover 'mistakes' made in the selling of the 'product' only....HOWEVER, Mike, why wouldn't this be a 'steering' case? Or minimally defimation of character, thus damaging (or potentially) your business reputation? I don't know what the 'slanderous' remarks were, but if there are bad, and I'm assuming they are, that's the path I'd take.
I'm sorry but I don't know that the E&O policy would cover it....(doubt it)...
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:49 pm Post Subject: The problem with a slander suit
Like all suits whether they be libel, slander or tortious interference, is that you have to prove damages by loss of income. How is a business person going to know all the work that was directed away from them and how much potentially they suffered if you are still busy and making a profit. You may not be able to expand your business and it may not even be your desire, but there should be an award or avenue to penalize individuals or corporations that tarnish your good name.
That is why the O&E was suggested. If an agent was given wrong information and he spread the defamation, you could sue the agent for being in error.
The only way small businesses can affect a company that chooses to use this type of steering, is to go after the individuals and not the corporation.
You have to have a pattern and practice established to show damages on a tortious interference case.
I would hate to be a young enterprising individual and trying to establish a new business based on the quality of service you provide, when the deck is stacked against you, and you do not have first crack at consumers. Someone plants a seed of doubt in their mind and they want to believe that their insurer is helping them so they wind up where they were steered to.
I personally am fortunate in that I have a twentyfive year customer base that do not listen to telemarketers for that are hired to direct accident claims to preferential shops that give concessions in exchange for those refererals. But sometimes you just have to punish those financially that choose to tarnish small entrepeneur's good names.
Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 01:07 am Post Subject:
For this situation to be "steering", the agent would need to have a shop or group of shops that he is trying to push the customer towards by using any means possible, such as wrongly defaming anyone other than those he recommends or telling the insured they could only go to the shops he recommends.
If the agent had a bad experience with this shop, and has accurate details to back up his experience, he is not slandering or defaming the shop. He is informing the customer of the situation he experienced. As long as the agent was truthful of the experience and made only a recommendation to not use the shop, I couldn't see how a suit could be won by the shop.
Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 03:03 am Post Subject: what say you if?
What if the agent is only guilty of repeating hearsay and he did not diligently attempt to find that the information is true and it isn't. I'd say he is guilty or at the very least responsible for perpetuating the mistruth and harming a business.
Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:20 am Post Subject:
That is why the O&E was suggested. If an agent was given wrong information and he spread the defamation, you could sue the agent for being in error
I don't think so Mike...(re:e&o)....I still think it pertains only to the 'product'...but I certainly could be wrong, I've only handled/assisted with a handful of e&o claims in my long career...and all were related to the policy it's self.... :cry:do not listen to telemarketers for that are hired to direct accident claims to preferential shops that give concessions in exchange for those refererals
huh? what's this about mike? You mean there is telemarketing in your area about this? really? what is said etc? I mean is it an 'if' you have an accident go here type thing? (based on some of our other threads, don't want you to get the wrong idea, i'm not doubting you at all just curious how this works)... :wink:Like all suits whether they be libel, slander or tortious interference, is that you have to prove damages by loss of income.
But do you really in a pure defimation case?You have to have a pattern and practice established to show damages on a tortious interference case.
In your case mike, do you have more than one instance where this agent is doing this ? Is that what you mean that you have to have repeated attempts by this agent? Is/was this agent, steering to another shop or was he/she out and out saying that you're no good, period? (i would 'think' that would make a difference, don't know but would think so)....What if the agent is only guilty of repeating hearsay and he did not diligently attempt to find that the information is true and it isn't. I'd say he is guilty or at the very least responsible for perpetuating the mistruth and harming a business
I agree with you both (mike and MB) he can recount an experience that he is aware of and is factual....(ie, this shop fixed my mom's car and she had to take it back six times for this or that, so "I" don't recommend them to anyone based on that experience) nothing wrong with that...however if you get outside 'fact' based experience I think you could be in trouble...mike, I'm going to try and find a thread, there is an agent, I think maybe ins maze, that had something similar, I think it was a slanderous thing, and I think (the more I think about it) e & o was involved...(it was another agent maybe) does anyone else remember this? I'll see if I can find it and post the link if applicable...
Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 06:28 pm Post Subject:
Mike (sorry it took me so long I forgot) here's that thread about an e&o claim that was paid, I didn't re-read the entire thread but if memory serves there was some slander or liable involved...anyway check it out and let me know..
http://www.ampminsure.org/claims/about3879.html#17810
Add your comment