Insurance contracts are inherently difficult to understand.  The language used in automobile insurance policies is drafted by lawyers, to by understood only by other lawyers.  Its as if simple sentences were translated from English to Spanish to German and back to English again, only to the be placed into the insurance policy.  It is important to understand however, that Missouri courts have recently cracked down on insurance companies who purposely draft ambiguous insurance policies.  The Courts have done so in favor of applying coverage in favor of the insured.  I wouldn't call this a victory, but certainly it is a step forward towards placing accountability on the 'drafter' of the insurance policy, which ALWAYS is the insurance company.  Lets be honest, commercial insurance companies aren't hurting for money, and they will continue to fight towards denial of coverage before they roll over and accept it.

An ongoing issue in Missouri as far as insurance coverage disputes goes is in regards to UNDERinsured motorist coverage (UIM).  UIM is not a requirement in Missouri, although it should be.  UIM coverage applies when a motorists sustains serious personal injury or death and recovers a minimal amount from the at-fault party's insurance carrier.  If the injury victim's damages were not fully compensated by the at-fault party's insurance (ie: a minimum $25,000 policy), then the victim may be able to look to his/her own automobile insurance coverage IF it has UIM coverage.  Most automobile insurance companies require UIM coverage limits (if the insured chooses to purchase UIM) to be the same as UNinsured motorist (UM) limits.  A motorist with UM and UIM coverage is an intelligent consumer.  Hindsight is 20/20, and those victimized by negligent car or truck drivers will have a better chance at obtaining full compensation for their serious personal injuries if they had UIM coverage at the time of the crash.

The most recent decision of the Courts in favor of coverage was in Jones v. Mid-Century Insurance Company (2008).  In that case, the Court ruled that an insurance policy was ambiguous when it purported to provide UIM limits of $100,000 per accident in one portion of the policy, and in another part of the policy the UIM limits were reduced by a 'credit' or 'set off' provision.  According to the Missouri Court of Appeals, the purpose of UIM coverage is "to compensate an insured for those damages which have not already been paid by a tortfeasor via liability insurance, self-insurance, or some other means."

Contact Missouri Car Accident Injury Lawyer Stephen Schultz and get your questions answered.  Don't be victimized twice by an insurance company that is only concerned with its own financial interests.  Contact a Missouri personal injury lawyer today for guidance!