How Ethical Doctrines from the Beginning of the Written Word to the Present Resulted in the Incorporation of the Covenant of Good Faith
New Book from Barry Zalma
The Compact Book on Ethics for the Insurance Professional
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gCVTzc2C and see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gERBXeD3 and at https://lnkd.in/ghU3vDaC and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4300 posts.
Posted on October 8, 2022 by Barry Zalma
How Ethical Doctrines from the Beginning of the Written Word to the Present Resulted in the Incorporation of the Covenant of Good Faith
Every Person Involved in the Business of Insurance Must Act Ethically in the Business of Insurance
Insurance is, by definition, a business of the utmost good faith. This means that both parties to the contract of insurance must act fairly and in good faith to each other and do nothing that will deprive the other of the benefits the contract of insurance promised.
Without the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and ethical people who work in the insurance industry applying and fulfilling the covenant, effective insurance to spread the risk of loss to a large community of insurance professionals, is impossible. One cannot act fairly and in good faith without being a person with a well-formed ethical compass.
In 1776, Lord Mansfield acting as an appellate judge serving in the House of Lords of Britain (the predecessor of the United Kingdom) for the first time referred to the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. In the case designated: Carter v. Boehm S.C. 1 Bl. Burr 1906, 11th May 1766. 593, 3 Lord Mansfield in the British House of Lords stated the rule of uberrimae fide (Latin for utmost good faith).
Ethics & Ethical Behavior are Essential to Every Insurance Professional
Good faith forbids either party by concealing what he privately knows, to draw the other into a bargain, from his ignorance of that fact, and his believing the contrary.
Insurers, when deciding to insure or not insure a risk, rely on the information provided to them by the insured. As Lord Mansfield instructed, the insured must provide the information requested thoroughly, honestly and in good faith.
The implied covenant is simply stated by explaining that no party to a contract of insurance should do anything to deprive the other of the benefits of the contract.
The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing imposes obligations on all parties to the contract of insurance. It not only applied to claims by an insurer, a first party property insured, a third party liability policy insured, the insurer, the insurer’s employees, underwriters, and claims personnel.
Since at least 1766, the business of insurance is a business of the utmost good faith. Each party to a contract of insurance must deal with each other ethically. This book will consider and explain different ethical concepts from the Code of Hammurabi more than 3000 years ago to modern ethical philosophers.
The general duty of good faith and fair dealing incorporated by reference into every policy of insurance requires a complete understanding of ethics and ethical behavior. For Example, the California Supreme Court noted that: “In every insurance contract there is an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing that neither party will do anything which will injure the right of the other to receive the benefits of the agreement.” [Gruenberg v. Aetna Insurance Co., 9 Cal.3d. 566, 108 Cal. Rptr. 480 (1973)].
The covenant is mutual, and the principles of good faith and fair dealing impose an affirmative obligation on the insured to cooperate as much as it requires the insurer to treat the insured fairly with regard to every claim presented.
This is a duty imposed by tradition, by the need to deal fairly and by court precedent and statutory law, not one arising from the terms of the contract itself.
The duty to deal fairly and in good faith is nonconsensual in origin rather than consensual. It is an unwritten, but essential part of every insurance contract.
It is imposed to fulfill the spirit, as well as the letter, of the insurance relationship and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing is a statement of the ethical basis of the insurance business.
Without the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and ethical people who work in the insurance industry applying and fulfilling the covenant, effective insurance to spread the risk of loss to a large community of insurance professionals, is impossible. One cannot act fairly and in good faith without being a person with a well-formed ethical compass.
In 1776, Lord Mansfield acting as an appellate judge serving in the House of Lords of Britain (the predecessor of the United Kingdom) for the first time referred to the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. In the case designated: Carter v. Boehm S.C. 1 Bl. Burr 1906, 11th May 1766. 593, 3 Lord Mansfield in the British House of Lords stated the rule of uberrimae fide (Latin for utmost good faith):
Good faith forbids either party by concealing what he privately knows, to draw the other into a bargain, from his ignorance of that fact, and his believing the contrary.
Insurers, when deciding to insure or not insure a risk, when deciding to honor or reject a claim, rely on the information provided to them by the insured. As Lord Mansfield instructed, the insured must provide the information requested thoroughly, honestly and in good faith.
The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing imposes obligations on all parties to the contract of insurance. It not only applied to claims by an insurer, a first party property insured, a third party liability policy insured, the insurer, the insurer’s employees, underwriters, and claims personnel.Since at least 1766, the business of insurance is a business of the utmost good faith. Each party to a contract of insurance must deal with each other ethically.
What is The Purpose of the Book
This book considers and explains different ethical concepts from the Code of Hammurabi more than 3000 years ago to modern ethical philosophers.
The book covers, at least:
What is Insurance?
Ethics & Ethical Behavior.
Ethical Insurance
The Development of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith & Fair Dealing.
The Tort of Bad Faith
The Ethical Insurance Professional
Applying Ethics to the Work of the Insurance Professional
Sarbanes Oxley & the Ethical Insurance Professional
What Happens When a Cort Creates an Ethical Conflict When None Exists?
Ethics and Insurance Fraud
Ethics in the Insurance Industry
Case Studies of Ethical Breach
The general duty of good faith and fair dealing incorporated by reference into every policy of insurance requires a complete understanding of ethics and ethical behavior.
It is imposed to fulfill the spirit, as well as the letter, of the insurance relationship and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing is a statement of the ethical basis of the insurance business.
The book is available as a Kindle book, a Paperback or a Hardcover
Who Needs This Book?
If you employ people in the business of insurance your business will be improved if every one of your employees reads and applies the ethical concepts described in the book.
If you are an insurance claims professional, an adjuster, supervisor, claims manager, defense counsel, or insurance coverage counsel the book will provide the knowledge necessary to apply the ethical concepts described in this book.
If you are a person insured or about to be insured you need this book to understand your ethical obligations to the insurer and the insurer’s ethical obligations to you.
The Author
Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims handling, insurance bad faith and insurance fraud almost equally for insurers and policyholders. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as an insurance coverage and claims handling lawyer and more than 54 years in the insurance business. He is available at http://www.zalma.com
and [email protected] and receive videos limited to subscribers of Excellence in Claims Handling at locals.com https://zalmaoninsurance.locals.com/subscribe.Subscribe to Excellence in Claims Handling at https://barryzalma.substack.com/welcome.
Now available Barry Zalma’s newest book, The Tort of Bad Faith, available here. The new book is available as a Kindle book, a paperback or as a hard cover.
Write to Mr. Zalma at [email protected]; http://www.zalma.com; http://zalma.com/blog; daily articles are published at https://zalma.substack.com.
Go to the podcast Zalma On Insurance at https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma; Follow Mr. Zalma on Twitter at https://twitter.com/bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library
Arsonist Tried To Represent Himself, Failed, and Sought Habeas Relief
Post number 5357
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/he-who-acts-his-own-lawyer-has-idiot-client-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-d4bwc, See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Karacson’s Arson for Profit Attempt Required Skill & Experience to Succeed
In Steve Ellis Karacson v. David Shaver, Warden, No. 25-1089, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit (May 20, 2026) Steve Karacson was convicted in Michigan state court of arson and insurance fraud after evidence showed he burned his own insured home. Investigators found multiple points of origin, gasoline odor, and evidence tying him to the scene, including cell-phone location data and a receipt showing he had purchased a gas can and gloves shortly before the fire.
FACTS
Karacson initially had appointed counsel, but his relationships with both appointed attorneys ...
Foolish to Repeatedly Disobey Court Orders
All That Remains For Trial Is Plaintiff’s Damages On Each Of These Claims And Establishing Proximate Causation Of Those Damages.
Post number 5348
See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus 5300 posts.
In Linh Wang v. Esurance Insurance Company, No. C24-0447-JCC, United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle (May 1, 2026) John C. Coughenour, United States District Judge, found that throughout this case, culminating with its briefing on Plaintiff’s renewed motion and that Defendant has subjected Plaintiff to unnecessary motion practice for clearly discoverable information and made dubious representations (including to the Court).
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case involves an underinsured/uninsured motorist insurance bad faith claim arising from a 2017 motor vehicle collision. The plaintiff, Linh Wang, alleges that Esurance Insurance ...
The Right to Negotiate with Insurer is Not an Assignment of Claims
Post number 5347
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ambiguous-contract-repair-assignment-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-2xppc, see the full video at https://rumble.com/v79is1s-ambiguous-contract-to-repair-not-an-assignment.html and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Nebraska Requires an Actual Assignment to Allow Contractor to Sue Insurer
In Millard Gutter Company, a corporation doing business as Millard Roofing and Gutter v. Farmers Mutual Insurance Company of Nebraska, also known as Farmers Mutual Insurance, also known as Farmers Mutual, No. A-24-818, Court of Appeals of Nebraska (May 5, 2026) Millard sued Farmers as an assignee of Jane Anzalone who had hired Millard Gutter to repair the roof of her home and agreed to allow Millard Gutter to coordinate with her insurer, Farmers Mutual, concerning reimbursement for repairs authorized under her insurance policy.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In ...
Coverage for Damage to Vacant Dwelling Limited
Post number 5388
Vandalism Damage to Vacant Dwelling Excluded
Posted on July 7, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Tyrone Williamson v. Farmers Insurance Co., 2026-Ohio-2530, C. A. No. 30717, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second District, Montgomery (July 2, 2026) Tyrone Williamson owned a duplex in Dayton, Ohio that he rented as two separate units. While the units were unoccupied by tenants, break-ins occurred in February, March, and April 2024, causing damage to doors, windows, walls, plumbing, flooring, fencing, lighting, a ceiling fan, grass, and other parts of the property, and resulting in the theft of items including tools, generators, a power washer, an air-conditioning unit, car wheels, and a radio.
Farmers Insurance paid approximately $17,000 for some damage from the first break-in but denied other claimed losses, including additional property damage, stolen personal property, and lost rent.
The trial court granted summary judgment to Farmers Insurance on Williamson’s ...
Court Allows itself to be Abused by Convicted Murderer and Insurance Fraudster
A Prisoner Has a Limited Right to file a Habeas Petition but Must do so Properly
Post number 5387
Posted on July 6, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Court Allows itself to be Abused by Convicted Murderer and Insurance Fraudster
A Prisoner Has a Limited Right to file a Habeas Petition but Must do so Properly
Post number 5387
In Tami Duvall v. State Of Indiana, No. 1:25-cv-01239-SEB-TAB, United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division (July 1, 2026) Indiana prisoner Tami Duvall filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging her 2011 Indiana convictions for murder, insurance fraud, and obstruction of justice.
Law:
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) governs amendment of pleadings, allowing amendment as of course within specified time limits and otherwise permitting amendment with leave of court when justice so requires.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) permits the Court to strike redundant matter. Rule 5 of the Rules ...
It is a Crime to Lie to Your Insurer That Accident Happened After Policy Inception
Post number 5386
Posted on July 3, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Conviction for Fraud Affirmed Because Evidence Overwhelming
In State Of Washington v. Saleem Mumin Robinson, No. 87244-3-I, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1 (June 29, 2026) Saleem Robinson was involved in an automobile collision on May 18, 2021. The other driver, Mohamed Waggeh, photographed Robinson’s documents and later reported the collision to GEICO, identifying the time as approximately 12:40 p.m.
That same day, at 6:06 p.m., more than five hours after the accident, Robinson purchased Progressive insurance for the vehicle involved in the collision.
The next morning, Robinson called Progressive to report the claim and stated that the accident occurred around 6:15 p.m. Progressive recorded that call without advising Robinson that it was being recorded. Progressive later conducted a special investigative unit investigation the claim because it was submitted shortly ...
