Bahri v. IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company
Michigan Court of Appeals opinion rules that a “general fraud exclusion” precludes a claim for No-Fault benefits based on mistakes in “replacement services” statements
Case impact:
In Bahri v. IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that a “general fraud exclusion” in a Michigan auto No-Fault insurance policy allows an insurer to disqualify a car crash victim from receiving all No-Fault benefits based on mistakes — so-called “fraudulent misrepresentations” — in the victim’s “replacement services” statements.
As a result of Bahri, insurance companies – and their adjusters – have been on the hunt for any mistakes they can use to claim “fraud” in any car crash victim’s replacement services or attendant care form submissions and wage loss claims.
When they find such a “mistake,” the insurers and their lawyers cry “fraud” — trotting out Bahri as their rationale for immediately denying and/or cutting off any and all of the car accident victim’s present and future No Fault auto insurance benefits.
Importantly, the Michigan Supreme Court’s ruling in Meemic v. Fortson seems to have limited the impact of Bahri by ruling that mistakes in a person’s submittals or deposition testimony can void a policy’s coverage only if they were part of an insured’s failure to perform a substantial part of the contract or one of its essential terms.
For more information, read our blogs on Bahri v. IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company:
Last updated:
