embezzlement insurance payout

[CloggieBoots]

What is the name of your state? Tennessee

Total loss payment on a boat, Multiple names as name-insured, as in: and/or. Fraudulent papers were used to prove ownership. Insurance-agent is a bad-faith case and underwriters are unaware of any wrongdoing. Full payout transfered to one person without any knowledge of others. Where to start, please help.

C.

 

[claimlaw]

Work fast!

Easy. Demand a stop pay on the check. Advise insurer of the reason. Explain that failure to do so will afford them the opportunity to pay twice. Make sure that your name is included on the check and is delivered to you via some certified manner. If you cannot work it out with the other parties, the insurer will likely initiate a declaratory action against all named loss payees.

Claimlaw

 

[CloggieBoots]

too late

Easy. Demand a stop pay on the check. Advise insurer of the reason. Explain that failure to do so will afford them the opportunity to pay twice. Make sure that your name is included on the check and is delivered to you via some certified manner. If you cannot work it out with the other parties, the insurer will likely initiate a declaratory action against all named loss payees.

Claimlaw

Thank you for your good advice but unfortunatly the money was wired on January 20 as we found out 3 days ago by calling the underwriters. The other party is keeping all and any effort to contact this person is fruitless. The insurers say they acted properly on the policy and are denying all coverage to 2nd Named Insured (my husband). Even to the extend that they say that the policy declaration page they sent us with both Named Assured on it (as an e-mail attachment and by normal mail) was never issued by them!!. They call our efforts to find justice in this matter a sordid adventure. The underwriters stay silent. For me this is defamation, breach of contract, fraudulent conveyance, breach of fiduciary duty and maybe intentional tort. I don't like the word but to me it smells like conspiracy. Please, any comments more than welcome!!!

C.B.

 

[claimlaw]

I guess I don't understand.

It is not up to the insurer to determine the extent of your insurable interest, but to include all names on the payment(s).

Are you a named insured? How many others are also named insureds? What is their interest?

Claimlaw

 

[CloggieBoots]

Thank you Claimlaw,

Yes I am a Named Insured and there is one more, no check, it was a wire-transfer.
The Insurer said he has never issued an Insurance Policy with both names as Named Insured, so he is saying the policy with declaration page the insurer sent us by e-mail and by regular mail doesn't exist.
The Named Insured who has the money is a minority shareholder (and the shares are held by a nominee) in a foreign company which is the (provable beyond any doubt) rightfull owner of the vessel.
My interest is C.E.O., majority shareholder of the company and captain and caretaker of the vessel. Payment was on a constructive total loss claim (hurricane damage)

Looking forward to your comments.

C.B.

 

[claimlaw]

"Yes I am a Named Insured and there is one more".

Are you an individual or business. What type of policy are we talking about? Who is the "one more"? What is their relationship to you and the vessel? Who says the policy, upon which the insurer has paid, doesn't exist? On what basis was the payment made?

Claimlaw

 

[CloggieBoots]

Are you an individual or business.

-I am an individual with an insurable interest

What type of policy are we talking about?

-Indemnity marine insurance policy

Who is the "one more"?

-An Englishman who lives in California

What is their relationship to you and the vessel?

-He is a minority shareholder in the company, the company that owns the vessel

Who says the policy, upon which the insurer has paid, doesn't exist?

- The insurer says they never issued a policy with more than 1 Named Insured they say the only Named Insured is the Englishman in L.A.

On what basis was the payment made?

The vessel was a constructive total loss, and the Englishman from L.A. said the vessel was his, registered in his name alone

 

[2 Bagger]

More ??

Who executed the application for the insurance coverage? Who made the premium payments? Were they paid out of an escrow account related to the financing of the vessel? So, are you saying that you and the Englishman are business partners in the boat? - What I am trying to get at here is determining the extent of your insurable interest. Did you hold a security interest in the vessel? Was the boat a yacht[pleasure], work boat or passenger?

Claimlaw

 

[CloggieBoots]

Who executed the application for the insurance coverage?
- The Brit in California

Who made the premium payments?
- The first year the Brit, the second year I did (the year in which the claim was made)

Were they paid out of an escrow account related to the financing of the vessel?
-no, the vessel is free and clear, this years premium payment from my personal account to the account of the Insurer

So, are you saying that you and the Englishman are business partners in the boat?
-He is a minority shareholder, whose shares are held by a nominee (that's what he wanted) so legally he has no standing in the company.

What I am trying to get at here is determining the extent of your insurable interest. Did you hold a security interest in the vessel?
-My interest is C.E.O., majority shareholder of the company and captain and caretaker of the vessel. This is how I make a living or better said ' made ', sailing excursions with the vessel.

Was the boat a yacht[pleasure], work boat or passenger
-It's a (non U.S.)passenger sailing multihull in the (non U.S.)Caribbean, which is where I am too

 

[claimlaw]

Well...you have a problem.

If the insurer does not recognize you, you don't get paid. Right now, they have no incentive to recognize you as an insured since they may have to pay this claim twice for getting it wrong. You might try to call the agent and in a normal reasonable voice, ask why your name was not included as an additional insured.

Otherwise, that leaves the matter between you and the "Brit". It is a civil matter. That means that you must pursue the "Brit" for damages. It would help if your contract provided for your insuranble interests - it may. Jusrisdiction of the matter should also be outined in your partnership agreement.

If this is a corporation, why would there be any other insured's other than the corporation?

Claimlaw

 

[CloggieBoots]

Well...you have a problem.

If the insurer does not recognize you, you don't get paid. Right now, they have no incentive to recognize you as an insured since they may have to pay this claim twice for getting it wrong. You might try to call the agent and in a normal reasonable voice, ask why your name was not included as an additional insured.

Otherwise, that leaves the matter between you and the "Brit". It is a civil matter. That means that you must pursue the "Brit" for damages. It would help if your contract provided for your insuranble interests - it may. Jusrisdiction of the matter should also be outined in your partnership agreement.

If this is a corporation, why would there be any other insured's other than the corporation?

Claimlaw

The fact is : I DO have the declaration pages with both Named Insured as Insured, the Insurers are now saying yes they did sent it but it isn't real. During the claimhandling according to the Insurers I was the Insured (many emails), only after the payment was made to the other guy did they change their tune and said I was never covered.

I know it is too bizarre for words, never ever have I heard of an Insurer who first said Yes you are insured and later is saying You were never insured. And all this in writing.

The "partnership" is a Private Limited Company and this Company was as far as I was let to believe the Loss Payee. That's why the Declaration Page was in Both Names.

 

[claimlaw]

If you are an named insured. You should be writing a very strong letter that addresses their possible breach of their duty of good faith and fair dealing and the fact that they owe you a duty to name you on any payments.

This will be an opportunity for them to pay twice - once to the "Brit" and once to you. If you threaten to sue; include the Agent's E&O coverage.

In fact, as I think about this, instead, give the agent a call and ask him to confirm your status as an insured. Again, get it in writing. Then go back to the top of this message and reread.

Claimlaw.

Are you in the US? I'm not familiar with a "Private Limited Company". Perhaps a Limited Liability Company?

 

[CloggieBoots]

If you are an named insured. You should be writing a very strong letter that addresses their possible breach of their duty of good faith and fair dealing and the fact that they owe you a duty to name you on any payments.

-there has been an email "war" going back and forth between me and the agent. he says I was added as a Named Insured for 'licencing purpose' only (whatever that means I have no idea?)

This will be an opportunity for them to pay twice - once to the "Brit" and once to you. If you threaten to sue; include the Agent's E&O coverage.

- I have told him (and now done so) I would start the official claim procedure with Lloyds of London, if he would not pay me.

In fact, as I think about this, instead, give the agent a call and ask him to confirm your status as an insured. Again, get it in writing. Then go back to the top of this message and reread.

Claimlaw.

Are you in the US? I'm not familiar with a "Private Limited Company". Perhaps a Limited Liability Company?

-no I am in a Non US Caribbean Island, Yes Limited Liability Company Thank you

C.B.

 

[ALawyer]

Let's see if I understand your question. I understand an insurance company has paid the claim. It only has to pay once IF the insureds were A or B or C and it paid to A. It need not notify B and C.

OR are you saying there was fraud on the insurance company? If so, report it to the Company and the police.

Or that A owes 1/3rd to each of B and C - that's a civil matter and you have to sue A.

Or, the agent participated in the fraud?

 

[CloggieBoots]

Yes the Insurance Company paid out the claim to the person who under the Insurance Law had no legal insurable interest. The agent had the proof in his hands all the time who the true owner was of the vessel, who had 100% legal insurable interest, but the agent didn't want to listen to us and subsequently paid the other guy.

C.B.