18 June 2022

I can't even...

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — Geico could be required to pay a Missouri woman $5.2 million because she said she contracted a sexually transmitted disease while having sex in the car of a man who is insured by the company...

According to court documents, the woman, identified as M.O., and a man, who were in a relationship, had sex in the man’s car. She contends she contracted HPV, human papillomavirus, because the man did not tell her he had the disease. HPV can cause cervical cancer, certain other cancers and genital warts.

In February 2021, M.O. notified Geico she planned to seek a $1 million insurance settlement against the man. She argued the man’s auto insurance provided coverage for her injuries and losses.

The insurance company refused the settlement offer, saying the woman’s claim did not occur because of normal use of the vehicle, according to court documents...

An arbitrator eventually determined she should be awarded $5.2 million for damages and her injuries.
Via AP News.

5 comments:

  1. Jaysus!!! Can you say entitlement?!?!

    ReplyDelete
  2. So if the woman got pregnant, Geico would have to pay child support? Anyone seeking to reproduce: have sex in an insured automobile--raising kids is expensive!

    ReplyDelete
  3. She and the man also had sex in 4 or 5 other non-vehicular locations.
    Geico like most corporations demand you sign an arbitration agreement in order to be a customer or employee. This cuts their legal costs and the arbiters are "reasonable" people who will usually side with the corporation.
    When Geico heard the ruling they understandably really didn't take it seriously, and made a halfassed appeal to the court which they lost. So when they got serious and went to appeals court the judge said no, you've used up your chances.
    Sounds to me like a pissing match between the courts and Geico lawyers. But as silly as this case sounds it will hurt everyone with car insurance. Maybe a discount if you can prove medically sterilized.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Would this work with homeowners insurance as well?

    ReplyDelete
  5. There is a good summary about the case here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpITyDIIz_k

    ReplyDelete