|
Immediate
Consent to Binding Arbitration Letters Required
for all Injury Claims
A recent decision of the Oregon Court of Appeals
in a UIM case underscores the need for immediate
issuance of letters to insureds consenting to
binding arbitration at the first knowledge that
an insured has been injured in an auto
accident—whether or not the insured appears to
have injuries that would implicate UM or UIM
coverages.
In the case of Hall v. Speer, decided July 20,
2011, the Oregon Court of Appeals held that a
combination of the insured’s application for PIP
benefits, the results of a PIP IME, and
correspondence from the insured’s counsel that
did not make a UIM claim on behalf of the
insured, provided the UIM insurer with enough
notice that the six month clock under ORS
742.061 had started running, long before a UIM
claim was asserted. Click
here to read the entire decision.
When the insured then did, considerably later,
expressly make a UIM claim, and the insurer sent
its consent to binding arbitration letter two
months later, that was held to not be timely for
purposes of preventing an attorney fee claim
(which currently, under ORS 742.061, is
one-sided only and never provides for attorney
fees to the insurer, even if the insurer
prevails at trial).
Unless the Oregon Supreme Court were to accept a
Petition for Review of the Hall case, or
the legislature were to change its effect,
insurers would be well-advised at this time to
develop a pattern letter, to be used in all
injury claims (starting with PIP), advising the
insured that coverage is accepted and that if a
dispute as to liability of the adverse driver or
the amount of benefits due under PIP, UM, or UIM
coverages ever arises, the insurer consents to
have such dispute resolved by way of binding
arbitration. Doing so immediately should
seriously reduce the risk of the one-way
provisions of ORS 742.061 applying to make
attorney fees owed.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
the author: Jay D. Enloe
(jay@lerlaw.com)
at 503-768-9600.
|