It’s Not You, It’s Them: Dealing With Insurance Coverage Denials
Time 3 Minute Read

If your company has an emergency response plan—and it likely does—filing an insurance claim needs to be included in that plan. But what if your insurer stretches out the consideration process by making continuous, costly information requests without making a coverage determination? Or decides to deny coverage under one clause of the policy, but accept coverage under another? Or outright denies coverage? Policyholders should be prepared to comply with policy obligations (which may vary depending on the controlling state law), such as the sharing of relevant information and documentation or participating in arbitration or a mediation prior to suing the insurer, but also understand the responsibilities insurers have to policyholders when a claim is tendered. 

Insurers’ typical duties include:

  • acknowledgment of the claim;
  • duty to investigate;
  • right and duty to defend;
  • right to defense counsel; and
  • right to settle.

Upon assessment of a coverage denial, policyholders should review the entire policy, including any endorsements and schedules, carefully to determine their options. Many policies contain endorsements or amendments that may change the terms of the original policy and scope of existing coverage that the insurer may have overlooked. 

Other best practices to include as part of the “plan,” include having a system for documenting relevant information and incurred costs, especially those incurred in the immediate aftermath, before the insurer can assess the loss, and having a pre-determined list of emergency vendors who can assist in restoring business operations as quickly as possible. A written record of communications with the insurer also is important for the insurance claim, but also if it is necessary to commence a lawsuit for coverage. For example, the insurer may assert a late notice defense which precludes coverage. In this case, documentation of the policyholder’s timely report of the claim may be necessary.

Policyholders also should understand which stakeholders, internal and external, should be included in the claim process. This may include named insured entities, where the claim is being made by an additional insured or subsidiary, brokers and coverage counsel who have specialized knowledge about insurance claims and disputes, and can help navigate the claim process.  Among other things, experienced coverage counsel can help to ensure compliance with policy conditions and other requirements, pursue prompt payment and other policy benefits that may be due, and protect your rights in the event the insurer refuses to fully accept the claimed loss.  

  • Associate

    Olivia’s practice focuses on complex insurance litigation and advising policyholders in insurance coverage matters. Olivia represents clients in all stages of complex insurance coverage actions, with matters involving ...

  • Partner

    Latosha helps policyholders maximize insurance recoveries with sound advice and effective solutions. Latosha delivers comprehensive end-to-end counsel to help clients with all of their insurance coverage needs from policy ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 4 Minute Read

In a recent opinion addressing cross‑motions for summary judgment, a Pennsylvania state court set forth a clear holding that policyholders may recover post-judgment interest under excess liability insurance policies only when the policy language expressly says so—and only when the stated conditions are met. The decision underscores the importance for policyholders to thoroughly examine the defense and payment provisions outlined in their insurance policies.

Time 4 Minute Read

In April 2025, the Eleventh Circuit reversed a judgment against a Florida lodge and held that a jury should determine whether the failure of the lodge’s insurer to initiate settlement proceedings before a claim was filed constituted bad faith. In reversing the district court, the Eleventh Circuit reinforced the key duty imposed on insurers under Florida law to diligently and carefully investigate claims and act with an appropriate degree of care to protect their insureds or face consequences such as bad faith liability.

Time 1 Minute Read

Still feeling the love from Valentine’s Day, this 2024 Year in Review highlights the most swoon-worthy coverage decisions of 2024 and offers a glimpse of the future of insurance coverage litigation in 2025 and beyond.

In 2024, D&O coverage and core insurance law principles were the true heartthrobs of the year, while rulings on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues showed that insurance disputes can arise in any situation. But the real cupid’s arrow? Policy interpretation—still the key to unlocking these cases. As we reflect on the year, this edition of our Year in Review highlights the most love-worthy coverage decisions of 2024 and examines the evolving landscape of insurance coverage litigation heading into 2025.

Time 6 Minute Read

An Alaska federal court recently dismissed a construction company’s lawsuit, accusing a D&O insurer of bad faith refusal to provide coverage for an email spoofing scheme that resulted in nearly $2 million in fraudulent wire transfers. Alaska Frontier Constructors, Inc., v. Travelers Cas. and Sur. Co. of Am., No. 3:24-cv-00259 (D. Alaska, Nov. 11, 2024). While the case was voluntarily dismissed before the D&O insurer responded to the complaint, the policyholder’s allegations tell a familiar story and highlight several areas of dispute that companies face when navigating the fallout from cyber incidents.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page