Indiana Court of Appeals concludes that Auto-Owners Insurance Company's underinsured motorist provision vague and ambiguous
In Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Cathy Benko, et al., the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded that the plain language of an insured's underinsured motorist provision in the policy "would lead an ordinary policyholder to believe that they were required to bring a bodily injury claim against the alleged tortfeasor within the applicable statute of limitations."
A Starke County woman was involved in a motor vehicle collision on August 17, 2007, which resulted in her suffering personal injuries. She filed her lawsuit against the at fault driver on August 11, 2009, just several days before the 2-year statute of limitations ran. In September 2009, she received a policy limits settlement offer of $100,000 from the at fault driver's insurance company. She then notified her insurance company (Auto-Owners) of the settlement offer and in October 2009 notified Auto-Owners that she would be making an underinsured motorist claim on her auto insurance.
Auto-Owners' policy language stated:
a. TIME LIMITATION FOR ACTIONS AGAINST USAny person seeking Uninsured or Underinsured Motorist Coverage must:
(1) present a claim for compensatory damages according to the terms and conditions of the policy; and
(2) conform with any applicable statute of limitations applying to bodily injury claims in the state in which the accident occurred.