Insurance Premiums

Dunn v. American Heritage Life Ins. Co., 05-C-012 (Hillsborough, North, May. 12, 2005)

Before the court is one of several similar lawsuits concerning the alleged failure of numerous insurance companies to refund unearned insurance premiums to their clients. Sharon Dunn and Robin Preve (the "plaintiffs") are purchasers of credit life and credit disability insurance issued by American Heritage Life Insurance Company ("the defendant" or "AHL"), a credit insurer. The plaintiffs have brought an action on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated against the defendant, alleging: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (3) restitution; (4) breach of fiduciary duty; (5) conversion; and (6) equitable relief including an accounting, the imposition of a constructive trust, and an order requiring AHL to implement controls to assure the prompt refund of unearned premiums. The plaintiffs now move for class certification as to Count I (Breach of Contract), contending that this case satisfies the requirements of Superior Court Rule 27-A. The defendant objects. Upon review of the parties' pleadings and the applicable law, the court finds and rules as follows.

Carlisle v. St. Mary's Credit Union, 05-C-0090 (Hillsborough, North, Nov. 10, 2005)

The present matter before the Court is in the opening stages of a potential class action law suit. Amanda Carlisle, the plaintiff, has brought this action on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated against St. Mary's Credit Union ("the defendant" or "St. Mary's''). The plaintiff and other members of the putative class are purchasers of credit life and/or accident and disability insurance issued by Universal Underwriters Life Insurance Company ("UULIC") who financed their purchases through retail installment sales contracts. The defendant is the assignee/holder of the contracts. This case arises out of the defendant's failure to provide notice to UULIC regarding the plaintiffs prepayment of her loan prior to the expiration of the credit insurance coverage and loan terms. The defendant now moves to dismiss the plaintiffs Writ, arguing that the relevant statute, RSA 361-A, fails to provide a private right of action for the plaintiffs claims. The plaintiff objects. On September 8, 2005, the Court held a hearing on this motion. For the reasons stated in this order, the defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED.

Amoche, et al. v. Guarantee Trust Life Ins. Co., 04-C-674 (Hillsborough, North, May. 9, 2006)

The plaintiffs, Frederick Amoche ("Amoche"), Diane Dauphinais ("Dauphinais"), and Jon Valliere ("Valliere") initiated this cause of action on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated against the defendant, Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Company ("GTL"). The plaintiffs each allegedly purchased credit life and/or credit disability insurance issued by the defendant, a credit insurer, as part of a retail installment sales contract for the purchase of an automobile. The plaintiffs have asserted five claims arising from the defendant's alleged breach of its contractual, statutory, and fiduciary obligations to refund unearned premiums to the plaintiffs upon early loan repayment.
Syndicate content