(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of this car accident case and its proceedings.)
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing
(Plaintiffs against Defendants XYZ and DOES 1-20)
29. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference each and every allegation of this Complaint as though fully set forth in this cause of action.
30. At all times relevant herein, Defendants, and each of them, agreed to act in good faith and deal fairly with Plaintiffs in all matters related to the Policy, and insurance claims arising from losses covered thereunder, including the uninsured motorist and medical expense claims.
31. Said Defendants assumed a special relationship with, and fiduciary obligations to, and agreed to abide by the duties commensurate with these obligations. Nevertheless, Defendants refused and failed to act in good faith and deal fairly with Plaintiffs, and breached said obligations, as set forth more particularly herein.
32. Defendants engaged and continue to engage in an unreasonable course of conduct to further their own economic interests in violation of their contractual and fiduciary obligation to Plaintiffs, including but not limited to:
a) Unreasonable and bad faith failure to make a full and fair settlement of Plaintiffs’ medical expense claims;
b) Unreasonable delay and/or denial of payment of policy benefits without proper cause;
c) Bad faith failure to give the Policy a reasonable and fair interpretation consistent with the plain meaning of the Policy and consistent with the reasonable expectations of the parties thereunder
d) Unreasonable misrepresentation to Plaintiffs of facts related to insurance coverage and attempts to settle Plaintiffs’ claims under the Policy in bad faith;
e) Bad faith failure to reasonably and promptly investigate, adjust, and process Plaintiffs’ claims for damages and medical expenses;
f) Not attempting in good faith to effectuate a prompt, fair and equitable settlement of Plaintiffs’ claims for damages;
g) Unreasonable refusal to place the financial interests of Plaintiffs on an equal par with Defendants’ own financial interests; and
h) Intentional and willful deprivation of the full amount of the insurance benefits to which Plaintiffs are entitled to under the Policy without making a full and complete investigation with regard to the damages suffered by Plaintiffs and the medical expenses incurred based thereon. (See Part 6 of 6.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.