There seems to be missing information. I have never worked Montana claims. Is this a case of the claimant seeking coverage under bodily injury and medical payments? And being denied MP? Or are all claims on the deceased’s behalf being denied?
Apparently the widow had already received a settlement on this case and her attorneys were trying to collect more off of Med Pay suggesting he was an occupant of a truck that ran over him.
Med pay is only offered for first party claimants, not 3rd party, that is what the liability coverage is there for. If the at fault party did not carry high enough limits to satisfy the 3rd party claimant, they will have to sue the at fault party directly. This attorney was just looking for any coverage he could get to pay this. I’m glad to see the courts sticking to the policies.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
There seems to be missing information. I have never worked Montana claims. Is this a case of the claimant seeking coverage under bodily injury and medical payments? And being denied MP? Or are all claims on the deceased’s behalf being denied?
Apparently the widow had already received a settlement on this case and her attorneys were trying to collect more off of Med Pay suggesting he was an occupant of a truck that ran over him.
thaks for doing the Journal’s job, Slim. makes a little more sense now.
they should have included that in the story !!!!
Med pay is only offered for first party claimants, not 3rd party, that is what the liability coverage is there for. If the at fault party did not carry high enough limits to satisfy the 3rd party claimant, they will have to sue the at fault party directly. This attorney was just looking for any coverage he could get to pay this. I’m glad to see the courts sticking to the policies.