Lawyer’s Tack in Auto Case
The Times’ article dealing with the wrongful conversion of several autos by a Newport Beach auto dealer (Feb. 17) brought to light another example of an unconscionable lawyer in action.
The owners of the “stolen” autos were told by their attorney, Mark Roseman, to file theft claims that would be denied. Then, he suggested, the owners could file a bad-faith lawsuit against the insurance companies.
Bad faith for what? The policy specifically excludes wrongful conversion embezzlement in the same manner that it excludes war, nuclear action, wear and tear. If insurance companies paid for wrongful conversions, rates would really skyrocket. Boy, the criminals would have a field day and operators like Auto Gallery would thrive.
The insurance companies pay for claims arising from reckless driving, drunk driving and drug influence. They pay for claims arising from theft of autos because their owners have left the keys in the ignition, sometimes even with the motor running!
More and more we hear the words bad faith used as a method of forcing insurance companies to pay invalid claims. The successful suits in this area have been mostly in health and accident insurance, where some companies have been unfair in the settlement of claims. To apply this rationale to a policy that specifically excludes the loss simply does not make sense. Yet an attorney is pushing this course of action as though it is a valid approach.
JOHN G. WATKINS
Long Beach
Start your day right
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
