PLOhiohard
Under Linko v. Indemnity Ins. Co. of N. Am. (1999) — the pre-2001 standard for offering UM/UIM coverage in Ohio — which combination of insurer actions was required to demonstrate a valid offer of UM/UIM coverage?
AA verbal mention of UM/UIM at the point of sale only
A written offer that disclosed coverage availability, premium, available limits, and a brief description of coverage, with the insured's response
COnly delivery of the policy declarations page listing the bodily injury liability limits selected by the named insured at the time of application
DA post-loss confirmation by the agent that UM/UIM had been discussed
Why this is the answer
Linko v. Indemnity Ins. Co. (1999) imposed a four-part test for a valid offer of UM/UIM coverage. Failure on any prong meant the coverage was deemed included as a matter of law at the same limits as BI liability. The 2001 amendments to R.C. 3937.18 replaced this offer doctrine with a simpler written-rejection rule that is conclusive.
Studying for the Ohio Personal Lines exam?
This question comes from our PL bank. Take a free practice test — no signup.