Adding Named Insured Does Not Change Policy's Refusal of UM Coverage
Post 4897

Progressive Select Insurance Company appealed the summary final judgment rendered in favor of its insured, Cindy Dunkel in her declaratory judgment action concerning whether she was entitled to uninsured motorist coverage.

In Progressive Select Insurance Company v. Cindy Dunkel, No. 6D2023-1429, Florida Court of Appeals, Sixth District (September 20, 2024) the right to UM coverage was explained.

BACKGROUND

In June 2011, Kenneth Dunkel, a single man, applied to Progressive for insurance coverage for his vehicles. Cindy Browning was listed on the application as a “rated driver” because she lived at the same address. As a rated driver, Cindy had rights to the bodily injury benefits under the policy.

Cindy was involved in a motor vehicle accident with an uninsured motorist.

She gave Progressive timely notice of the accident and sought to recover under the UM portion of the policy which was rejected. S

The trial court denied Progressive’s amended motion for summary judgment and granted Cindy’s motion for summary judgment, reasoning that a new contract was created when Cindy’s status changed to “named insured” and, thus, Progressive was required to send her the UM Selection/Rejection Form.

EVIDENCE

The evidence reflected that Progressive provided Kenneth with the approved UM Selection/Rejection Form in 2011. Kenneth was the sole named insured on the policy at that time. His written rejection of UM coverage gave rise to a conclusive presumption that Kenneth made an informed, knowing acceptance of such limitations on behalf of all insureds. Under section 627.727(9), Kenneth’s initial rejection of UM coverage applied “to any policy which renew[ed], extend[ed], change[d], supersede[d], or replace[d] [that] original policy.

ANALYSIS

Progressive established that Kenneth never dropped off the policy; he remained as a named insured throughout the life of the policy.

The amendment of the policy to add Cindy as a named insured did not result

Therefore, the trial court erred in entering summary judgment in favor of coverage and the judgment was reversed.

ZALMA OPINION

UM coverage places a person’s insurer in the position as the insurer of an uninsured motorist. Selection or rejection of UM coverage is controlled by statute in Florida. The statute allows an insured to reject UM coverage and the rejection follows every renewal of the policy without a need for new rejections, even when a new Named Insured is added to the policy. Since neither Cindy nor her spouse changed the rejection of the UM coverage there is no coverage for the injuries Cindy received from an uninsured motorist.

(c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe

Go to X @bzalma; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk