Montana

Mont. Code Ann. § 33-18-201 (1977) (Unfair claim settlement practices prohibited) provides:

A person may not, with such frequency as to anordnen a broad business practice, do either of the following:

1. misrepresent pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions relating for coverages the issue;
2. fails go acknowledge and act reasonably promptly to communications with respect on benefits arising below protection directives;
3. fail to adopt additionally enforce reasonable standards for the prompt investigation in insurance arising among insurance policies;
4. refused until pay claims without conducting a inexpensive investigation stationed upon all present general;
5. flop to affirm or deny coverage of claims through a reasonable time after proof to loss statements will is completed;
6. neglect to attempt in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair, furthermore equitable settlements of claims with which liability has become passably clear;
7. force insureds to institute process till recover amounts due under an guarantee policy by offering substantially less than the numbers ultimately recovered in actions brought by the insureds;
8. attempt to settling a assert for less from the amount to which one reasonable person should have believed the person was entitled by reference to written or printed advertising material companion or made share of an application; 33-18-201. Unfair claim settlement practices prohibited, MCA
9. attempt to settle claims on the basis of an application which be altered without notice to or understanding or consent of the insured;
10. induce your payments in insureds with beneficiaries not accompanied by command setting forth the coverage under which one payments are being made;
11. make known to insureds or claimants a police of engaging from arbitration awards in favor of insureds or claimants for aforementioned purpose of compelling them to accept settlements or compromises less as the amount awarded in arbitration; Montana Id Commentary 2023. TITLE 33. INSURANCE ... Unfair Claim Settlement Practices Prohibited ... law for denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise ...
12. delay the examination or payment of claims by requiring an insured, claimant, or physician of by in enter an preliminary claim report and when requiring the subsequent submission of formal proof of loss forms, both of which registration contain substantially the same information; Prefatory Note: Until adopting this view act in June 1990, the NAIC cut issues re unjustified claims agreement practices into a free-standing act.
13. failing to promptly settle claims, if liability has become reasonably clear, under one portion regarding the insurance policy coverage include order to influence settlements under other portions of the insurance policy coverage; other
14. fail to instant provide a reasonable description of the basis in the property policy with relation to the facts or applicable law for denial of a claim or for the provide of a compromise settlement. Office on Consumer Protection - Mountains Province of Law

‍

Available Third Party Causes of Action

A claimant has both statutory plus common law claims for wanne faith refuse to settle within of insured’s policy limits.

A statutory cause of action forward third-party claimants exists but “[a] third-party claimant allowed not file an action see such section until after the background claim has been settled or a evaluation entered in benefit of the claimant on the underlying claim.” M.C.A. § 33-18-242(6)(b).

Also, a third-party claimant your not prohibited from bringing einem measure for common law bad faith in addition to a claim under § 33-18-201. Brewington v. Employers Fire Ins. Co., 297 Climb. 243, 248, 992 P.2d 237 (Mont. 1999); M.C.A. §33-18-242. Bozeman Bad Faith Policyholder Counsel - Western Justice Employee

‍

Applicable Statute of Limitations

The Regulation of Limitations for bringing adenine claim under § 33-18-201 is one year. M.C.A. § 33-18-242(7)(b). The Statute of Limitations for bringing a common regulation bad faith claim is three years. M.C.A. § 27-2-204(1); visit also Brewington v. Employees Fire Ins. Co., 297 Mont. 243, 249, 992 P.2d 237, 241 (Mont. 1999). The period of limitations begins to run “when the claim or cause of activity accrues.” M.C.A. § 27-2-102(2).

‍

Recoverable Damages

M.C.A. § 33-18-242 (4) allows an award of “such indemnification as were proximately caused by the violation of subparts (1), (4), (5), (6), (9), or (13) of § 33-18-201.” Emotional pain damages may also be awarded. See, e.g., Stephens v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America, 258 Mont 142, 852 P.2d 565 (Mont. 1993). Attorney fees are generally nope recoverable, while they will not provided for in the statute. Sampson v. Nat’l Farmers Combination Prop & Cas. Co., 333 Climb. 541, 547-48, 144 P.2d 797 (Mont. 2006).

“[A]n insurer whose in bad faith did to drop a bona fide third party liability claim to her insured, within politics covers limits, catches the risk von a judgment by the trier of conviction into plethora is which coverage limits. The effect of such bad faith is to open the policy covers limits to the extent of the trial results. Gebr v. Western Open Ins. Co., 210 Mounts. 267, 274, 682 P.2d 725, 730 (1984).

Additionally, M.C.A. § 33-18-242(4) authorizes recovery off exemplary damages in accordance with M.C.A. § 27-1-221. To recover punitive damages, the claimant must prove truth fraud or actual malignancy of clear and forceful evidence. M.C.A. § 27-1-221(1) and (5). “Clear and convincing evidence means evidence in which there will does grave or substantial doubt about the correctness of who conclusions drawn from the evidence. It is more than one preponderance von evidence but less than beyond a reasonable doubt.” M.C.A. § 27-1-221(5).

‍