Appeal from the Order of the Insurance Commissioner of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in case of In Re: Appeal of Aegis Security Insurance Company, Insured: Mearl Livington, Policy No. MH 00 12 975, Docket No. P82-10-12.
S. Walter Foulkrod, III, Foulkrod, Peters & Wasilefski, for petitioner.
Mary Hannah Leavitt, with her, Elizabeth S. Babbitt, for respondent.
Judges Williams, Jr., Barry and Palladino, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Barry.
[ 84 Pa. Commw. Page 164]
Aegis Security Insurance Company (Aegis) initiated this appeal from an order issued by the Insurance Commissioner of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Commissioner).
On March 10, 1981, Aegis issued an insurance policy to Mearl Livingston which covered his mobile home. Indiana Insurance Counselors, Inc. (Indiana), a duly authorized agent of Aegis, mailed a memorandum to the last known address of Mr. Livingston on December 23, 1981, which stated, in part:
The subject policy covering your 1972 Freedom mobile home will expire on March 10, 1982. We will not order a renewal of this policy unless you authorize us to do so either by telephone or mail. Please advise by January 14, 1982. Thank you.
When it received no response, Indiana mailed a second memorandum on February 22, 1982, identical to the first, to Mr. Livingston's last known address. He did
[ 84 Pa. Commw. Page 165]
not respond to this notice either. Mr. Livingston was not advised of nor did he receive a bill for the premium due to renew the insurance policy.
On April 17, 1982, Mr. Livingston's mobile home was destroyed by fire. Indiana was informed about the accident on April 19, 1982, and on April 27, 1982, Aegis denied coverage for Mr. Livingston's fire loss because his insurance policy had not been renewed because the premium had not been paid.
Some time after April 27, 1982, Mr. Livingston filed a complaint with the Department of Insurance. A department investigator, Carl Stumbaugh, investigated Aegis' denial of coverage for the fire loss. A representative of Aegis advised Mr. Stumbaugh that, although a notice of cancellation or notice of non-renewal was not sent to Mr. Livingston, an offer to renew had been made to Mr. Livingston. Mr. Stumbaugh concluded that the memorandums sent to Mr. Livingston did not meet the standards for a valid ...