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
Anti-Public Adjuster Clause Is Effective in New York
Post number 5301
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/public-adjusters-attempt-represent-insured-subject-zalma-esq-cfe-rubfc, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Insurers May Contractually Prevent an Insured from Hiring a Public Adjuster
In Peter Barbato & North Jersey Public Adjusters Inc. v. Interstate Fire & Casualty Company, et al, No. 25-cv-5312 (JGK), United States District Court, S.D. New York (December 15, 2025) the plaintiffs, Peter Barbato and North Jersey Public Adjusters, Inc. (“NJPA”), filed suit against several insurance companies, including Interstate Fire & Casualty Company, Independent Specialty Insurance Company, and certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London.
FACTS
NJPA is a New Jersey-based public adjusting firm licensed in New York. The dispute centers on ...
Anti-Public Adjuster Clause Is Effective in New York
Post number 5301
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/public-adjusters-attempt-represent-insured-subject-zalma-esq-cfe-rubfc, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Insurers May Contractually Prevent an Insured from Hiring a Public Adjuster
In Peter Barbato & North Jersey Public Adjusters Inc. v. Interstate Fire & Casualty Company, et al, No. 25-cv-5312 (JGK), United States District Court, S.D. New York (December 15, 2025) the plaintiffs, Peter Barbato and North Jersey Public Adjusters, Inc. (“NJPA”), filed suit against several insurance companies, including Interstate Fire & Casualty Company, Independent Specialty Insurance Company, and certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London.
FACTS
NJPA is a New Jersey-based public adjusting firm licensed in New York. The dispute centers on ...
Proof of Highly Contaminated Water is Required for Extra Payments
Post number 5300
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/acting-your-own-lawyer-foolish-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-mbg0c, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Acting as Your Own Lawyer is Foolish
Evidence of Breach of Contract Survives Dismissal of All Other Charges
In Lee Lifeng Hsu and Jane Yuchen Hsu v. State Farm Fire And Casualty Company, C. A. No. N24C-09-020 CLS, Superior Court of Delaware (February 27, 2026) a claim to State Farm who paid approximately $61,000 after assessments but denied coverage for additional items including ceramic tiles, the kitchen floor ceiling, underlayment plywood, and numerous personal property items resulted in suit by the Hsu’s acting in pro per.
Facts
Lee Lifeng Hsu and Jane Yuchen Hsu (“Plaintiffs”) purchased a homeowners’ insurance policy from State Farm Fire...
Insurance Condition Requires Following the Intent of the Parties
Post number 5307
Principles of Contract Interpretation Compels Reading Contract as Written
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/portable-storage-containers-buildings-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-fkg1c and at https://zalma.com/blog.
In Eastside Floor Supplies, Ltd. v. SCS Agency, Inc., Hanover Insurance Company, et al., No. 2024-01501, Index No. 609883/19, 2026 NY Slip Op 01488, Supreme Court of New York, Second Department (March 18, 2026)
In May 2019, a fire damaged business personal property belonging to the plaintiffs, which was stored in portable storage containers at their Manhattan premises. At the time of the fire, the plaintiffs were insured under a businessowners insurance policy (BOP) issued by the defendant Hanover Insurance Company which provided general coverage for business personal property, and which included a specific extension for “Business Personal Property Temporarily in Portable Storage Units” (the portable storage ...
ERISA Saves Fraudulent Claims Suit
Post number 5306
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/failure-provide-well-pled-facts-defeats-most-action-zalma-esq-cfe-b4zuc and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Allegations of Fraudulent Insurance Billing Must be Pleaded with Specificity
In Genesis Laboratory Management LLC v. United Healthcare Services, Inc. and Oxford Health Plans, Inc., No. 21cv12057 (EP) (JSA), United States District Court, D. New Jersey (March 13, 2026) Genesis Laboratory Management LLC (“Genesis”), a New Jersey-based molecular diagnostic and anatomic pathology laboratory, provided COVID-19 related testing services and submitted claims for reimbursement as an out-of-network provider to United Healthcare Services, Inc. (“United”) and Oxford Health Insurance, Inc. (“Oxford”). Metropolitan Healthcare Billing, LLC (“Metropolitan”), owned by the same individual as Genesis, handled the billing for Genesis.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
United and Oxford, who administer both ERISA and ...
ERISA Saves Fraudulent Claims Suit
Post number 5306
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/failure-provide-well-pled-facts-defeats-most-action-zalma-esq-cfe-b4zuc and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Allegations of Fraudulent Insurance Billing Must be Pleaded with Specificity
In Genesis Laboratory Management LLC v. United Healthcare Services, Inc. and Oxford Health Plans, Inc., No. 21cv12057 (EP) (JSA), United States District Court, D. New Jersey (March 13, 2026) Genesis Laboratory Management LLC (“Genesis”), a New Jersey-based molecular diagnostic and anatomic pathology laboratory, provided COVID-19 related testing services and submitted claims for reimbursement as an out-of-network provider to United Healthcare Services, Inc. (“United”) and Oxford Health Insurance, Inc. (“Oxford”). Metropolitan Healthcare Billing, LLC (“Metropolitan”), owned by the same individual as Genesis, handled the billing for Genesis.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
United and Oxford, who administer both ERISA and ...