United States: Baldwin v. AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah Insurance Exchange

In Baldwin v. AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah Insurance Exchange, 1 Cal. App. 5th 545 (2016), the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's decision to sustain defendant AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah Insurance Exchange's ("AAA") demurrer to plaintiff William Baldwin's ("Plaintiff") complaint without leave to amend.

In reviewing the trial court's decision on demurrer, the Court accepted the allegations of the complaint and attached exhibit as true. Plaintiff's almost new vehicle was involved in a collision and sustained structural damage as a result thereof. Both Plaintiff and the other individual involved in the collision had insurance through AAA. AAA refused to consider Plaintiff's vehicle a "total loss" – instead, AAA had the vehicle repaired, reportedly for $8,196.06, and provided Plaintiff with a rental car during the time of the repairs. Plaintiff alleges the vehicle's future resale value decreased $17,100 as a result. Plaintiff filed suit alleging negligence against the other driver, and breach of contract and bad faith against AAA. Plaintiff alleged:

AAA was obligated, under his insurance policy and that of [the other driver], either to pay him the entire pre-accident value of the pickup or to repair the pickup to its original pre-accident condition, and that AAA did neither. After repair work was completed, [Plaintiff] contends, the pickup did not match its pre-accident condition "with respect to safety, reliability, mechanics, cosmetics and performance" and its future resale value had decreased by $17,000. The rental vehicle provided him also did not match the pre-accident value of the pickup, and [Plaintiff] seeks the difference in value for the period that the pickup was under repair.

AAA demurred, on the basis that Plaintiff was essentially seeking lost market value which was excluded by the policy. The trial court agreed, and sustained the demurrer as to the causes of action against AAA. Plaintiff "did not seek leave to amend the complaint or identify further facts that might be added to an amended complaint." The trial court sustained the demurrer without leave, and ordered dismissal with prejudice as to AAA. Plaintiff appealed.

The Court noted the standard of review was de novo, and Plaintiff "bears the burden of demonstrating that the trial court erred in sustaining the demurrer."

The Court referenced established California case law that clear and explicit language in an insurance policy governs, finding that the policy language here was clear and explicit. The policy provided AAA "may" pay the loss in money or repair the damaged vehicle, and "[t]he policy's use of the term 'may' suggests AAA had the discretion to choose between the two options."

[Plaintiff] alleges generally that it was not possible to repair his almost new pickup to its original pre-accident condition and that AAA's attempted repairs did not restore the car to that standard. Other than the decline in future resale value, however, [Plaintiff] offers no specific factual allegations identifying any unrepaired damage or continuing performance issue with the insured vehicle. He does not allege that the pickup had specific mechanical problems when returned to him, was unsafe in any specific way, or had any specific cosmetic flaws. Indeed, in his opening brief, [Plaintiff] indirectly suggests the pickup may have been returned to him in a state arguably qualifying as "normal running condition," although he vaguely cautions that repaired vehicles generally "may still be dangerous," and describes anecdotal reports of others (non-parties) who experienced grave post-repair accidents.

The Court referenced California's specificity in pleading requirement, rejecting Plaintiff's general allegations as conclusory. The Court also rejected Plaintiff's reliance on "case law indicating that an insurer has an obligation to repair a damaged vehicle to its 'pre-accident safe, mechanical, and cosmetic condition,'" determining "[t]he cases do not stand for the principle that a plaintiff may rely on general allegations to meet his burden in pleading a claim for breach of contract." One of Plaintiff's cited cases, Ray v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, 200 Cal. App. 3d 1411 (1988), specifically rejected an argument that the vehicle must be restored both to its preaccident condition and market value, "reasoning that a vehicle would not qualify as a total loss if it is restored to 'its normal running condition.'" The Ray Court found that accepting the position offered by the insured there, and Plaintiff here, would defeat the insurer's "right to elect the most economical method of paying claims." The more recent decision in Carson v. Mercury Insurance Company, 210 Cal. App. 4th 409 (2012) reached a similar conclusion: repairing a vehicle to its pre-accident condition does not require restoration to its factory condition. The Carson Court also noted that this debate prompted insurers to specifically exclude coverage for diminution in value after an accident.

The Court rejected Plaintiff's various arguments that attempted to circumvent the exclusion for diminution in value. Plaintiff argued the policy was ambiguous as the exclusion contradicts the loss provisions of the policy. The Court rejected this: "As noted, we do not find the exclusion ambiguous. Nor is it contradictory to the loss provisions. It merely limits their scope." The Court also rejected Plaintiff's argument that the exclusion may be disregarded as "fine print," finding, as a matter of law, that the language of the exclusion was conspicuous as to placement and visibility, and the language was plain and clear.

Finally, the Court rejected Plaintiff's claim that the exclusion violates public policy. Plaintiff "suggests the exclusion renders AAA's coverage inadequate and that it unreasonably denies him the benefits of the insurance contract in a way that violates public policy reflected in statute and case law," citing to subdivisions (h)(3) and (h)(5) of California Insurance Code section 790.03, which "declare as unfair claims settlement practices the failure, respectively, to follow 'reasonable standards' for promptly investigating and processing claims, or to promptly and fairly settle claims."

[Plaintiff] essentially argues that the insurance policy is fundamentally unfair and violates public policy because it allowed AAA the option of restoring his almost new vehicle to normal running condition, after an accident involving structural damage, without also requiring that it compensate him for the decrease in the vehicle's future resale value. His argument is undercut by California Supreme Court case law. In Julian v. Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co., supra, 35 Cal.4th 747, for example, the Supreme Court observed that "'[a]n insurance policy may exclude coverage for particular injuries or damages in certain specified circumstances while providing coverage in other circumstances.' [Citation.] It follows that an insurer is not absolutely prohibited from drafting and enforcing policy provisions that provide or leave intact coverage for some, but not all, manifestations of a particular peril. This is, in fact, an everyday practice that normally raises no questions ... ." (Id. at p. 759.) Thus, "an insurance policy can provide coverage for weather conditions generally, but exclude coverage for specific weather conditions such as hail, wind, or rain." (Ibid.) Applying the same logic, an insurer may cover the cost of repairing a car damaged in an accident, but exclude coverage for the accompanying decrease in the car's future resale value.

The Court also was not persuaded by Plaintiff's apparent argument "that the insurance policy here in question gives AAA an incentive to attempt superficial repairs to cars sustaining structural damage, returning unsafe cars to the roads, rather than declare them a total loss and pay out their actual (greater) pre-accident cash value," finding Plaintiff did not meet his burden of proof. The Court also noted there is a "strong public policy" in favor of allowing insurers to enforce unambiguous policy provisions. The Court also doubted the danger to the public:

The argument that literal enforcement of the policy at issue will create substantial financial incentives to effect purely cosmetic repairs, returning dangerous vehicles to the roads so as to injure the public, ignores the existence of various countervailing disincentives. These include the likelihood that the insurer would be financially responsible under the same policy for any damages resulting from future accidents of an insufficiently repaired vehicle. [Plaintiff] does not contend that AAA canceled his policy after the accident. Moreover, insurers would be liable for tort damages if, in bad faith, they directed cosmetic or superficial repairs to an insured vehicle.

The Court "reject[ed] [Plaintiff's] argument that the exclusion violated public policy and was void. As [Plaintiff's] claim for the difference in value between the rental vehicle AAA provided him and the pre-accident value of his pickup appears to rely on the same theory, it fails also."

The Court also determined Plaintiff's bad faith claim failed. Plaintiff reiterated his allegations regarding breach of contract in support of his bad faith claim. The Court determined: "These allegations do not suffice to present a cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing because, as discussed in the previous section, AAA's alleged conduct was consistent with the express provisions of the contract." The Court also noted that Plaintiff's claim the express terms of the policy breached the implied covenant misunderstands the nature of the implied covenant. The Court concluded the bad faith claim failed as "AAA performed as promised under the insurance policy," and Plaintiff did not allege any unreasonable delay or that the pickup was defective in any specific way other than the decreased resale value. The Court also concluded Plaintiff could not state a cause of action for bad faith under the other driver's policy, as Plaintiff as third party would not have a private right of action for unfair settlement practices.

The Court found Plaintiff's proposed amendments do not satisfy his burden of demonstrating a reasonable possibility to cure the defects in the complaint: "As [Plaintiff] has failed to offer any specific factual allegations indicating that the repairs to his pickup were deficient, beyond the fact that its future resale value was less than before the accident, he did not meet his burden in seeking leave to amend his complaint."

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.