Use a formal “bad faith” demand letter, not just an angry phone call.
A Declaration of War, Not a Bar Room Brawl
An angry phone call is a chaotic, emotional bar room brawl. You might land a few punches, but you look sloppy, you have no witnesses, and nothing is on the record. A formal “bad faith” demand letter sent by an attorney is a declaration of war, delivered by a diplomat. It is a calm, strategic, and terrifying document that lays out every one of the insurer’s transgressions and formally puts them on notice that you are now preparing for a legal battle. It ends the brawl and begins the war.
Stop just suing for the policy benefits. Do sue for punitive damages and attorney’s fees under a bad faith claim instead.
Don’t Just Get Your Stolen TV Back; Make Them Pay for the Alarm System
Suing for your policy benefits is like forcing a thief to return your stolen television. You get back what was originally yours, but that’s it. A “bad faith” lawsuit is different. It’s like telling the judge that the thief’s actions caused so much distress that he should not only have to return the TV, but he should also have to pay for your new alarm system, your therapy, and a huge penalty for his outrageous behavior. It punishes the wrongdoing, not just the initial theft.
Stop accepting unreasonable delays. Do document every delay and cite your state’s Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act instead.
The Landlord Who Illegally Ignores Your Calls
Imagine your landlord is legally required to fix your leaky roof within 30 days. After 60 days of unreturned calls, he is not just providing bad service; he is breaking the law. Your state’s “Unfair Claims” act is that law for your insurer. Documenting every delay and then citing that specific law in a formal letter is like sending your landlord a certified letter that quotes the exact housing code he is violating. It transforms your complaint from a simple plea into a formal accusation of illegal conduct.
The #1 secret to proving bad faith is showing the insurer had no reasonable basis for denying your claim.
The Umpire Who Knew He Was Making the Wrong Call
Imagine an umpire makes a bad call on a close play. That’s a mistake. Now, imagine the video replay shows the runner was out by ten feet, but the umpire, who saw the replay, still calls him safe. That is bad faith. You must prove the insurer wasn’t just mistaken; their denial was the equivalent of the umpire deliberately ignoring the video evidence. You must show that no reasonable company, looking at the same set of facts, would have ever made that same call.
I’m just going to say it: The threat of a bad faith lawsuit is the only thing that will make some insurance companies pay a fair settlement.
The Loaded Gun on the Negotiating Table
A standard claim negotiation is a polite conversation. But if the insurer is refusing to be reasonable, the threat of a bad faith lawsuit is like calmly opening your briefcase and placing a loaded gun on the negotiating table. The entire tone of the conversation changes instantly. The potential for massive, multi-million-dollar punitive damages is the one thing that can make a powerful, arrogant corporation feel fear. It is the ultimate leverage that forces them to move from a polite “no” to a very reasonable “yes.”
The reason your bad faith claim is weak is because you can’t prove the insurer acted intentionally or recklessly.
The Driver Who Drifted vs. The Driver Who Aimed for You
A simple mistake by an insurer is like a driver who accidentally drifts into your lane. It’s negligence, but it’s not bad faith. To prove bad faith, you have to show that their actions were the equivalent of a driver who looked you in the eye, took aim, and then deliberately and recklessly smashed into your car. You must prove their denial wasn’t just a mistake; it was a conscious or reckless disregard for the fact that they had no reasonable basis to deny your claim.
If you’re still not sending a time-limited settlement demand, you’re losing your chance to set up a bad faith claim.
The Trap You Must Set to Prove Their Unreasonableness
A “time-limited demand” (often called a “Holt” demand) is a legal trap you set for the insurer. It’s a formal letter from your attorney that says, “Here is all the evidence. You have 30 days to pay this reasonable, within-limits settlement, or the offer is withdrawn.” If the insurer unreasonably ignores or rejects this fair offer, they have just walked into your trap. Their failure to settle when they had the chance becomes a prime piece of evidence in your future bad faith lawsuit against them.
The biggest lie you’ve been told is that bad faith only applies to outright denials.
The Slow Torture, Not Just the Quick Execution
Bad faith is not just about the final execution (the denial). It is about the slow torture the insurer puts you through along the way. Deliberately delaying your claim for months, burying you in mountains of unnecessary paperwork, using intimidation tactics, or making a ridiculously lowball offer are all independent acts of bad faith. The law punishes them not just for failing to pay, but for failing to treat you with the “good faith and fair dealing” they owe you throughout the entire process.
I wish I knew that I could get a copy of the insurer’s claim file during discovery in a bad faith lawsuit.
The Search Warrant for Their Secret War Room
Filing a bad faith lawsuit gives your attorney a legal superpower: a search warrant called “discovery.” This forces the insurance company to unlock the door to their secret war room. Your lawyer can get a complete copy of their entire claim file, including the adjuster’s private and often revealing notes, the internal emails between managers discussing your case, and their expert reports. It is the one tool that allows you to see their entire strategy and find the smoking gun you need to win.
99% of policyholders make this one mistake: they settle their original claim, which can waive their right to sue for bad faith.
The Check That Buys Your Silence Forever
That settlement check for your original claim is a dangerous trap. Buried in the release document you sign is often a clause that says you are not just settling the claim for the broken pipe; you are waiving your right to ever sue the insurance company for anything related to this incident. You are accepting the money for the damage, but in exchange, you are giving up your powerful right to sue them for the bad faith they committed in handling the claim. It is the check that buys your permanent silence.
Use the insurer’s own advertising slogans against them in court, not just the dry policy language.
The Mirror That Shows Their Hypocrisy
In a bad faith trial, your lawyer can put the insurance company’s own multi-million dollar commercials up on a giant screen for the jury to see. They can then turn to the company’s executive on the witness stand and ask, “Your ad says you are ‘like a good neighbor,’ right? Now, please show the jury where, in your 18 months of delays and lowball offers, you acted like a good neighbor to my client.” This holds up a giant mirror, reflecting their own hypocrisy back at them in the most powerful way imaginable.
Stop letting the insurer lowball you. Do understand that a grossly inadequate offer can be evidence of bad faith instead.
The Insulting Offer That Proves They Are a Cheat
If you are selling a house that is clearly worth $500,000, and a professional real estate company offers you $50,000, their offer is not just a lowball; it is an insult. It is so disconnected from reality that it proves they are not negotiating in good faith. An insurer’s grossly inadequate settlement offer is the same thing. It is not just a starting point; it can be used as a prime piece of evidence that they are not trying to find a fair value, but are deliberately trying to cheat you.
Stop just being frustrated by their incompetence. Do frame it as an unreasonable investigation tactic instead.
The “Bumbling Idiot” Who Is Actually a Master Spy
The adjuster who keeps “losing” your documents, “forgetting” to return your calls, and “misunderstanding” the facts is not a bumbling idiot. They are a master spy playing a role. This feigned incompetence is a deliberate, strategic tactic. It is designed to create delays, to frustrate you, and to make you give up. You must not see it as incompetence; you must document it and frame it as what it truly is: an unreasonable, bad faith approach to investigating your claim.
The #1 hack for a bad faith claim is to show a pattern of similar conduct by the insurer in other cases.
One Act of Rudeness vs. a History of Assault
One bad act by an insurer can be dismissed as a mistake. But if your lawyer, through legal discovery, can find evidence that the company has used the exact same delay tactic or lowball strategy on 50 other claimants, you have just elevated your case from a simple disagreement to a massive, institutional pattern of misconduct. Proving that their behavior towards you was not an isolated incident, but a standard business practice, is the #1 way to get a jury to award massive punitive damages.
I’m just going to say it: Committing “bad faith” is a calculated business decision for some insurance companies.
The Cold, Hard Math of Corporate Greed
An insurance company is a giant, financial machine. They know that if they unfairly deny 1,000 claims, only a small fraction of those people will have the energy and resources to hire a lawyer and fight back. They have done the cold, hard math. They have calculated that the money they save from the hundreds of people who give up is far more than the cost of the few bad faith lawsuits they might lose. It is not an emotional decision; it is a cynical, calculated, and profitable business model.
The reason your case is not considered bad faith is because there was a “genuine dispute” over the facts or law.
The Umpire’s Close Call vs. the Blatantly Wrong Call
Bad faith is not about a simple disagreement. An insurance company is allowed to have a “genuine dispute” over a claim. It’s like two umpires watching a very close play at the plate and having a reasonable disagreement about the call. That is not bad faith. Bad faith is when the runner is clearly out by ten feet, and the umpire deliberately calls him safe anyway. There is no genuine dispute; there is only a blatant, unreasonable refusal to see the obvious truth.
If you’re still not documenting every broken promise and missed deadline, you’re losing your bad faith evidence.
Each Broken Promise Is a Brick in Your Fortress of Proof
A single broken promise is just a puff of smoke. But a detailed, written log of every single broken promise and missed deadline is a brick. By meticulously documenting every single one, you are not just complaining; you are slowly and methodically building a giant, unshakable fortress of evidence. When you finally go to your lawyer, you will not be showing up with a handful of smoke; you will be showing up with the blueprints to a fortress that they can use to win your war.
The biggest lie you’ve been told is that you can’t sue your own insurance company.
The Business Partner Who Broke the Contract
Your insurance policy is a business contract. You have promised to pay your premiums, and the insurer has promised to protect you. Believing you can’t sue your own insurance company is like believing you can’t sue a business partner who stole all the money from your joint bank account. They are a corporation, you are a customer, and you have signed a legally binding contract. Suing them for breaking that contract is your absolute, fundamental right.
I wish I knew that failing to defend me in a lawsuit was a classic example of insurance bad faith.
The Bodyguard You Hired Who Ran Away from the Fight
Your liability policy is a contract to hire a professional bodyguard. One of their most important duties is the “duty to defend” you. If someone sues you, and your insurance company refuses to provide and pay for a lawyer, they have not just breached the contract; they have abandoned you on the battlefield. This “failure to defend” is one of the most classic, clear-cut, and powerful examples of insurance bad faith, and it can lead to massive damages against them.
99% of people make this one mistake: they don’t hire an attorney who specializes in suing insurance companies.
The Divorce Lawyer vs. the Corporate Takeover Artist
Suing an insurance company for bad faith is not a simple lawsuit; it is a hostile corporate takeover. A general practice lawyer is like a great divorce attorney; they are not equipped for this kind of war. You need a specialist. You need the lawyer who is a corporate takeover artist, the one who has dedicated their entire career to this one, specific, high-stakes battle. They know the enemy’s playbook, they know the secret rules, and they are the only ones who can win.
Use the insurer’s internal training manuals to show they violated their own procedures, not just industry standards.
The Rulebook They Wrote, and Then Broke, Themselves
Through the legal discovery process, your lawyer can get a copy of the insurance company’s own, secret, internal training manuals. These manuals are the rulebook that tells their adjusters how to handle claims fairly. If your lawyer can show a jury that the adjuster on your claim violated the company’s own, written procedures, it is a devastating blow. It proves they didn’t just fail to meet the legal standard; they failed to meet the standard they set for themselves.
Stop accepting their excuse of being understaffed. Do argue that’s not a reasonable basis for delaying your claim instead.
The Restaurant That Excuses a Burned Steak on a Busy Night
Imagine a restaurant serves you a raw, burned steak, and the manager’s excuse is, “Sorry, we were really busy tonight.” That would be an unacceptable excuse. The insurance company’s claim that they are “understaffed” or “overwhelmed” is the same thing. It is not your problem. You paid for a first-class product. Their internal staffing issues are not a legally valid reason for them to breach their contractual duty to handle your claim in a prompt and reasonable manner.
Stop letting them conduct endless, intrusive investigations. Do argue it’s a form of harassment and bad faith instead.
The “Investigation” That Is Actually a War of Attrition
An insurance company has the right to investigate your claim. They do not have the right to use that investigation as a weapon to harass and intimidate you. If they are demanding endless, irrelevant documents, taking multiple, duplicative statements, and constantly moving the goalposts, it is no longer an investigation. It is a war of attrition. You must have your lawyer step in and argue that their actions have crossed the line from a reasonable inquiry into a bad faith attempt to make you surrender.
The #1 secret to a powerful bad faith case is an expert witness who can testify that the insurer’s conduct was unreasonable.
The Retired General Who Testifies Against His Own Army
To win a bad faith case, you have to prove the insurer’s conduct was “unreasonable.” But what does that mean? The secret is to hire your own expert witness, who is often a retired insurance executive or a former claims manager. This person is like a retired, decorated general who can now testify against his own army. They will review your file and then testify in court that, based on their decades of experience, the company’s handling of your claim violated all standard industry practices.
I’m just going to say it: Your state’s Department of Insurance is often a toothless tiger when it comes to punishing bad faith.
The Customer Service Desk, Not the Police Department
The Department of Insurance sounds like a powerful, government police force that will punish your insurance company. The reality is that they are often more like a customer service desk. They can be very helpful in getting a slow or unresponsive insurer to answer your calls, but they rarely have the power or the resources to conduct a full-scale bad faith investigation and levy the kind of massive fines that would actually change a company’s behavior. The real police are the jury in a courtroom.
The reason your bad faith letter was ignored is because it wasn’t sent from a lawyer.
The Angry Letter from a Citizen vs. the Official Subpoena
A strongly worded letter that you write yourself is an angry letter from a private citizen. The adjuster will likely read it, roll their eyes, and put it at the bottom of the pile. The exact same letter, printed on the official letterhead of a known, aggressive bad faith law firm, is an official subpoena. It is a credible, immediate threat of expensive and dangerous litigation. The words are the same, but the power behind them is infinitely different.
If you’re still cashing a check after a dispute without a “reservation of rights,” you may be waiving your bad faith claim.
The Check That Is a Silent Peace Treaty
When you are in a dispute, and the insurer finally sends a check, cashing it can be seen as a silent agreement. The legal term is “accord and satisfaction.” It’s like a handshake deal where your cashing of the check is your acceptance of their peace treaty. To protect yourself, you must cash it “under protest” or with a “reservation of rights.” This is a legal move where you take the money, but you formally declare that you are not surrendering and the war is not over.
The biggest lie you’ve been told is that you can’t claim for emotional distress in a bad faith lawsuit.
The Invisible Wounds of a Financial War
A bad faith insurance battle is not just a financial dispute; it is a brutal, emotional war. The sleepless nights, the anxiety, and the stress are not just side effects; they are a real, compensable injury. In most states, if you can prove the insurer acted in bad faith, you absolutely can make a claim for the “emotional distress” their outrageous conduct has caused you. The jury can, and will, award you real money for these very real, invisible wounds.
I wish I knew that I could recover more than my original policy limits in a successful bad faith case.
The Nuclear Option That Breaks All the Rules
Your policy limit is the contractual speed limit for your claim. In a normal accident, it’s the most you can get. A bad faith verdict is the nuclear option that breaks all the rules. A jury can award you not only your full policy benefits, but also your emotional distress damages, your attorney’s fees, and, most importantly, massive “punitive damages.” These are designed purely to punish the company, and they can be millions of dollars, far exceeding the original limits of your policy.
This one small action of sending a certified letter that summarizes every delay and demands a decision will be Exhibit A in your lawsuit.
The Official, Undeniable Start of the Paper Trail
That one, simple letter you send, via certified mail, is the first and most important piece of evidence in your future lawsuit. It is the document that proves you were not just a passive victim. It shows that you were an active, organized, and reasonable person who summarized the problems, pointed out the delays, and politely demanded the decision you were owed. When a jury sees that letter as “Exhibit A,” they will immediately see the insurer’s subsequent failure to respond as an act of bad faith.
Use the testimony of a former insurance adjuster, not just your own opinion, to prove the company’s bad practices.
The Insider Who Becomes the Whistleblower
Your opinion about the insurance company’s tactics is just that—an opinion. But the testimony of a former insurance adjuster, who used to work inside the machine, is a whistleblower’s confession. This expert witness can sit on the stand and explain to the jury, from their own, first-hand experience, exactly how the company’s internal systems, their software, and their bonus structures are all designed to underpay claims. They are the insider who can translate the company’s actions into a clear story of bad faith.
Stop letting them force you into an appraisal process to hide their bad faith conduct.
The Price Dispute That Is a Smokescreen for a Crime
Appraisal is a process to resolve a simple disagreement over price. But if the insurer has been deliberately delaying your claim and lying to you, the issue is not a price dispute; it’s bad faith. Insurers will often try to force you into appraisal to avoid the bigger problem. It’s like a thief who gets caught, and then tries to distract you by starting a long, complicated negotiation over the price of the goods he stole. You must not let their price dispute become a smokescreen for their crime.
Stop thinking a simple mistake is bad faith. Do prove that the insurer’s actions were conscious and deliberate instead.
The Doctor Who Made a Mistake vs. the Doctor Who Knew He Was Lying
A simple mistake, even a big, sloppy one, is “negligence,” not bad faith. It’s like a doctor who makes an honest error in a diagnosis. To prove bad faith, you must prove the insurer’s actions were the equivalent of a doctor who knew the correct diagnosis, but deliberately and consciously chose to lie about it to save money. You must show their actions were not just wrong, but that they knew they were wrong, or recklessly disregarded the fact that they were wrong.
The #1 hack for showing a lowball offer was in bad faith is to compare it to your contractor’s detailed estimate.
The $10,000 Bill vs. the $100,000 Invoice
The insurer’s lowball offer of $10,000, on its own, might just look like a starting point. But when your lawyer presents it to a jury next to your own, independent contractor’s detailed, 30-page, line-item estimate for $100,000, the picture changes. The sheer, massive gap between their number and the documented, real-world cost is the most powerful visual evidence you can have. It proves their offer was not a reasonable disagreement; it was a deliberate, bad faith attempt to cheat you.
I’m just going to say it: Insurers have a “cost of litigation” budget, and sometimes you have to make yourself part of that budget to get paid.
The Shoplifting Budget of a Giant Supermarket
A giant supermarket knows that a certain amount of shoplifting will happen every year. They have a budget for it. They see it as a normal cost of doing business. Insurance companies have the same thing; it’s called a “cost of litigation” budget. They know they will get sued, and they have already set aside the money to fight or settle those cases. Sometimes, the only way to get your fair share is to hire a lawyer and make your claim a line-item in that budget.
The reason your punitive damages claim is weak is because you can’t show malice or oppression.
The Jerk vs. the Criminal
To get “punitive damages”—the massive, punishing awards—you have to prove more than just bad faith. You have to prove the insurer’s conduct rose to the level of “malice, oppression, or fraud.” It is the difference between proving someone is a jerk and proving they are a criminal. You must show their actions were not just unreasonable; they were despicable, fraudulent, and done with a willful and conscious disregard of your rights. It is the highest and most difficult mountain to climb in the legal world.
If you’re still not documenting how the insurer’s delay has financially harmed you, you’re losing your consequential damages claim.
The Ripple Effects of Their Broken Promise
The insurer’s failure to pay is a stone thrown in the pond of your life. The direct damage is the unpaid bill. The “consequential damages” are the ripple effects. Did their delay cause you to max out your credit cards? Did it cause you to go into foreclosure on your home? Did it destroy your business’s credit? These are all real, foreseeable damages that were caused by their bad faith. You must meticulously document these ripple effects to have any chance of recovering them.
The biggest lie you’ve been told is that you have to accept the appraisal award, even if it was procured in bad faith.
The Crooked Referee’s Call Can Be Overturned
An appraisal award is supposed to be final and binding. But what if the game was rigged? If you can prove that the “neutral” umpire was actually a biased, hired gun for the insurance company, or that the entire process was a fraudulent sham, a court can and will throw out the crooked referee’s call. The appraisal is a powerful tool, but it is not above the law, and it can be overturned if you can prove it was infected with bad faith.
I wish I knew that forcing me to litigate to get what I was owed was a form of bad faith.
The War They Started for No Reason
You have a clear, valid claim. The insurer has no reasonable basis to deny it. But they deny it anyway, forcing you to hire a lawyer and file a lawsuit to get the money you were obviously owed. In many states, this act of “forcing you to litigate” is, in itself, an act of bad faith. They have forced you into a long, expensive, and stressful war that they knew from the beginning they were going to lose. You can then sue them for the cost of that unnecessary war.
99% of people make this one mistake: they threaten a bad faith lawsuit without having the evidence to back it up.
The Barking Dog with No Teeth
Threatening a bad faith lawsuit when you don’t have the goods is like a small dog barking ferociously at a mailman. It’s a lot of noise, but it’s not a real threat. The insurance company knows the law, and they know what it takes to prove a case. An empty threat from you or a non-specialist lawyer will be completely ignored. You must only make the threat when you have the well-documented, organized file of evidence to prove that your bark has a very real, and very dangerous, bite.
Use the insurer’s failure to communicate with you as evidence of bad faith, not just poor customer service.
The Ghosting That Is Actually a Legal Breach
In a normal business, an unreturned phone call is just bad customer service. In the world of insurance, it can be much more. The law says an insurer has a duty to communicate with their policyholder. A documented pattern of ignored emails, unreturned voicemails, and a general failure to respond to your reasonable inquiries is not just rudeness; it can be used as a key piece of evidence to prove they breached their duty of good faith and fair dealing. It is a legal violation, not just a personal frustration.
Stop letting them misrepresent the policy’s coverage to you. Do document these misrepresentations as a basis for a bad faith claim instead.
The Salesman Who Lies About the Warranty
Imagine a salesman tells you a product has a lifetime warranty, but after it breaks, the company points to the fine print that says the warranty was only for 30 days. The salesman has misrepresented the contract. When an adjuster tells you on the phone, “Don’t worry, that’s covered,” and they later deny the claim based on an exclusion, they have done the same thing. Documenting these verbal misrepresentations is powerful evidence that they are not dealing with you fairly and are acting in bad faith.
Stop accepting their biased expert report. Do argue that relying on a biased expert is an act of bad faith instead.
The “Independent” Appraiser Who Works for the Other Side
The insurer hires an engineer who gets 90% of his work from them. Unsurprisingly, his report supports their denial. They will present this as an “independent” opinion. But relying on a clearly biased expert is, in itself, an act of bad faith. You must argue that they had a duty to conduct a fair and objective investigation. By deliberately choosing a hired gun who they knew would give them the answer they wanted, they have breached that duty and have not acted in good faith.
The #1 secret to a fast settlement is to show the insurer’s lawyers that you have a perfectly documented bad faith case against them.
The Smoking Gun That Prevents the Trial
The insurance company’s lawyers are not afraid of a normal claim; they are terrified of a bad faith claim that could go to a jury. The fastest way to get a massive settlement is to have your lawyer present their lawyers with a perfectly organized, “open and shut” case of bad faith. It is the legal equivalent of showing them the smoking gun, the signed confession, and the video of their client committing the crime. They will pay a huge premium to settle that case quickly and quietly before it ever sees the inside of a courtroom.
I’m just going to say it: The legal standard for proving bad faith is incredibly high, and you need an expert lawyer to meet it.
The Mount Everest of the Legal World
Proving an insurance company breached their contract is like climbing a large hill. Proving they acted in bad faith is like trying to summit Mount Everest. The legal standard is incredibly high, the terrain is treacherous, and the air is thin. You cannot make this journey with a local hiking guide. You need a world-class, experienced Sherpa who has been to the summit of this specific mountain many, many times. It is one of the most difficult peaks in the entire legal world.
The reason your case settled is because the insurer was terrified of their internal emails being read to a jury.
The Private Diary That Becomes a Public Spectacle
An insurance company’s greatest fear is a jury. And the thing they fear most is having their own, internal emails read aloud in a public courtroom. Those private, often cynical and arrogant, emails between the adjuster and their manager are the dynamite that can blow up their entire case. The moment your lawyer gets those emails in discovery, the insurer’s leverage evaporates. They will often pay a massive settlement to prevent a jury of their own customers from reading their private, embarrassing diary.
If you’re still being polite after months of deception, you’re losing the appropriate tone for a bad faith dispute.
The Polite Customer vs. the Aggrieved Plaintiff
In the beginning, politeness is a virtue. But after months of documented delays, lies, and lowball offers, the time for politeness is over. You are no longer a “customer” trying to resolve a service issue. You are now a “plaintiff” in a serious, adversarial legal dispute. Your tone must shift from one of polite inquiry to one of firm, professional, and righteous indignation. You must make it clear that you understand the game has changed, and you are no longer willing to be their victim.
The biggest lie you’ve been told is that what happened to you was “just business.”
The “Business” That Is Based on a Sacred Trust
“It’s not personal, it’s just business.” This is the classic excuse for unethical behavior. But insurance is not just any business. It is a special, quasi-public trust. You are not buying a toaster; you are paying for financial peace of mind. The law recognizes this and holds insurance companies to a higher standard than any other business. When they betray that trust, it is not “just business.” It is a profound, personal, and legally actionable violation of a sacred duty.
I wish I knew about the “implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing” from day one.
The Invisible, Golden Rule of Your Insurance Contract
Hidden in every single insurance policy is an invisible, unwritten rule that is more powerful than anything in the fine print. It is the “implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.” It is the golden rule. It says that the insurance company must not do anything to unfairly deprive you of the benefits of the contract you paid for. Every bad faith lawsuit is based on the argument that the insurer has violated this invisible, common-sense rule of fairness that is attached to every policy.
This one small action of using the words “bad faith” in a written communication will change the entire tone of your claim.
The Single Word That Summons the Lawyers
The words “bad faith” are a legal term of art. They are a magic spell. To an adjuster, they are a blaring fire alarm that signals a normal claim is about to escalate into a dangerous, expensive, and career-threatening lawsuit. The moment you (or your lawyer) put those two, simple words into a formal, written letter, your file gets pulled from the normal pile and gets walked down the hall to the legal department. The entire game changes with the utterance of a single phrase.