FOLLOW US

This is the case of Mohamed v. Progressive Advanced Insurance Company, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania No. CV 21-5174, 2022 WL 1084738. This lawsuit was filed by pro se litigant, Nadia Mohamed, who sued Progressive for statutory bad faith, breach of contract, and common law contractual bad faith UIM claims. She also sought damages for the intentional infliction of emotional distress.

In this case, the court found that plaintiff’s allegations, that the insurer did not adequately investigate her claim, and made “low-ball” offers, did not meet the burden of proof necessary to prove bad faith. The court also remarked, that her claims were “conclusory” at best.

On April 11, 2022, the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania, found the statutory bad faith claim inadequately plead, lacking facts and asserting only conclusory allegations concerning (1) making a low-ball offer of $2,000 in the face of a $50,000 policy limit demand (2) the failure to investigate; and (3) the failure to consider medical records.

In its decision, the court states:

1. “Instead of alleging facts to show how [Progressive] failed to objectively and fairly evaluate her claim, she provides only ‘broad and conclusory statements.’”

2. “She must do more than characterize [Progressive’s] settlement offers as ‘lowball’ to show it unreasonably valued her claim.”

In an effort to elaborate on the elements that do rise to the level of bad faith, the court only alluded to what bad faith, is not, stating:

3. “’ [B]ad faith is not present merely because an insurer makes a low but reasonable estimate of an insured’s damages.’”

4. “It is ‘not unusual for there to be a disagreement between an insured and an insurance company over the value of an uninsured or underinsured motorist claim.”

The court also found that the allegations that the carrier failed to conduct a thorough or appropriate investigation of the plaintiff’s injuries, and that Progressive arbitrarily rejected her medical record evidence, are merely conclusory claims, stating:

5. Therefore, “absent additional facts about her claim and the accompanying investigation, negotiations or communications between her and the insurer, the Court cannot infer … bad faith.”

As to the claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, the court said this was not a separate cause of action, but was absorbed in the breach of contract claim.

Leave to amend the complaint was given on the plaintiff’s statutory bad faith and intentional infliction claims, but the contract-based bad faith claim was dismissed with prejudice as a separate cause of action.

Date of Decision: April 11, 2022

Mohamed v. Progressive Advanced Insurance Company, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania No. CV 21-5174, 2022 WL 1084738.