PLPennsylvaniahard
In *Houck v. State Farm*, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court addressed UM/UIM stacking and offsets. Which principle did the court reinforce?
AInsurers may unilaterally offset UIM limits without statutory authorization, even where no statute or policy provision permits the reduction
BLimited Tort election bars UM/UIM stacking altogether
Stacking waivers signed under § 1738 must be strictly construed against the insurer when ambiguous
DUIM coverage is never available when the at-fault driver carried minimum BI limits
Why this is the answer
PA courts in the *Houck* line of cases insist that § 1738 stacking waivers conform strictly to the statutory form and process. When ambiguity exists, courts construe the waiver against the carrier and restore stacked limits to the insured.
Studying for the Pennsylvania Personal Lines exam?
This question comes from our PL bank. Take a free practice test — no signup.