Settlement Alerts:

$9,250,000 Defamation Case Win Against The New York Times 8/26
$6,800,000 Wrongful Death 8/26
$81,000,000 Children Born Addicted (as part of the trial team)
$18,000,000 Product Liability 12/19
$13,000,000 Medical Malpractice – Sexual Assault 8/23
$225,000 Civil Litigation 7/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$30,000 Medical Malpractice 7/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$42,690 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$2,759,223 Opioid Litigation 6/26
$70,000 Medical Malpractice 6/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 6/26
$100,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$420,000 Jail Litigation 5/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$650,000 Jail Litigation 5/26
$46,937 Opioid Litigation 5/26
$150,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 5/26
$285,000 Medical Malpractice 4/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Personal Injury 3/26
$40,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$32,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$42,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 1/26
$30,000 Personal Injury 1/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 12/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 12/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$77,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$26,668 Personal Injury 9/25
$25,000 Personal Injury 9/25
$97,500 Personal Injury 9/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$100,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 8/25
$100,000 Wrongful Death 7/25
$45,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/25
$200,000 Wrongful Death 6/25
$1,200,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 6/25
$200,000 Slip & Fall 6/25
$26,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/25
$800,000 Jail Litigation 5/25
$925,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$125,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$700,000 Jail Litigation 4/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$125,000 Personal Injury 4/25
$20,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/25
$1,300,000 Jail Litigation 2/25
$210,000 Slip & Fall 2/25
$100,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/25
$975,000 Medical Malpractice 1/25
$4,000,000 Jail Litigation 1/25

$9,250,000 Defamation & False Light 8/26
$6,800,000 Wrongful Death 8/26
$81,000,000 Children Born Addicted (as part of the trial team)
$18,000,000 Product Liability 12/19
$13,000,000 Medical Malpractice – Sexual Assault 8/23
$225,000 Civil Litigation 7/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$30,000 Medical Malpractice 7/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$42,690 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$2,759,223 Opioid Litigation 6/26
$70,000 Medical Malpractice 6/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 6/26
$100,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$420,000 Jail Litigation 5/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$650,000 Jail Litigation 5/26
$46,937 Opioid Litigation 5/26
$150,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 5/26
$285,000 Medical Malpractice 4/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Personal Injury 3/26
$40,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$32,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$42,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 1/26
$30,000 Personal Injury 1/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 12/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 12/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$77,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$26,668 Personal Injury 9/25
$25,000 Personal Injury 9/25
$97,500 Personal Injury 9/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$100,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 8/25
$100,000 Wrongful Death 7/25
$45,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/25
$200,000 Wrongful Death 6/25
$1,200,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 6/25
$200,000 Slip & Fall 6/25
$26,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/25
$800,000 Jail Litigation 5/25
$925,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$125,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$700,000 Jail Litigation 4/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$125,000 Personal Injury 4/25
$20,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/25
$1,300,000 Jail Litigation 2/25
$210,000 Slip & Fall 2/25
$100,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/25
$975,000 Medical Malpractice 1/25
$4,000,000 Jail Litigation 1/25

CALL US NOW

5-Star Google Rating•BBB Rating: A+•West Virginia State Bar•The United States District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of West Virginia•The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals•The United States Supreme Court•American Association for Justice•Opioid Justice Team•Trial Lawyers Care•West Virginia Association for Justice•5-Star Google Rating•BBB Rating: A+•West Virginia State Bar•The United States District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of West Virginia•The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals•The United States Supreme Court•American Association for Justice•Opioid Justice Team•Trial Lawyers Care•West Virginia Association for Justice

Bad Faith Litigation Lawyer in Bethlehem

Holding Insurers Accountable

Your Guide to Bad Faith Insurance Claims

Bad faith litigation involves legal action against an insurance company that has acted unfairly or unlawfully in handling a claim. At Stephen New & Associates, serving Bethlehem and surrounding areas of West Virginia, we represent individuals and businesses who face improper denials, unreasonable delays, or bad faith settlement tactics by insurers. If your claim has been rejected without clear grounds or your carrier has failed to investigate in a timely or thorough manner, you may have grounds to pursue remedies under state law. Contact our office in Beckley or call 304-355-5565 to discuss how a focused review of your policy and insurer conduct can clarify your options and next steps.

Bad faith issues arise in many contexts, from automobile and property claims to commercial coverage disputes and first party benefits. Common signs include unexplained denials, long delays in responding to documentation, failure to provide a reasonable explanation for a decision, or offers that do not fairly reflect the scope of covered loss. Pursuing a case often begins with gathering policy documents, correspondence, and proof of loss or damages. The process may involve demand letters, formal complaints, and litigation if necessary. Understanding your rights under West Virginia law and the practical options for resolving a dispute helps you make informed decisions about whether to negotiate, mediate, or proceed to court.

Why Pursuing Bad Faith Claims Matters

Pursuing a bad faith claim serves multiple purposes beyond seeking compensation. It can remedy the financial harm caused by an insurer’s wrongful denial or delay, cover out-of-pocket costs and losses that the insurer refused to pay, and create leverage to reach a fair settlement. Bringing a claim also encourages better claims handling practices by insurers and can deter future misconduct. For businesses and individuals alike, holding an insurer accountable can restore access to resources needed for recovery and reduce the long-term disruption that an unresolved claim may cause. Careful documentation and a well-prepared legal strategy are central to achieving an effective outcome.

About Stephen New & Associates — Serving Bethlehem and Beckley

Stephen New & Associates is a personal injury and insurance law firm with a presence in Beckley and service to communities such as Bethlehem in Harrison County, West Virginia. The firm assists clients with a range of claims including bad faith litigation, first party property disputes, and UM/UIM matters. Our approach focuses on clear communication, timely investigation of claim files, and thorough preparation for negotiation or litigation. We work to explain legal rights and practical options so clients can make informed decisions. You can reach the firm by phone at 304-355-5565 to schedule an initial consultation and begin a review of your insurer’s handling of your claim.

Understanding Bad Faith Litigation and Your Rights

Bad faith litigation addresses situations where an insurer fails to fulfill its contractual and statutory obligations in handling a claim. Examples include denying a valid claim without reasonable justification, failing to investigate promptly, making settlements that ignore clear coverage, or refusing to communicate essential reasons for actions. Under West Virginia law, policyholders have rights derived from the insurance contract and state statutes, and improper conduct by carriers can give rise to claims for contract damages and, in some cases, additional remedies. Understanding the distinction between a disputed claim and actionable bad faith requires review of policy terms, claim file activity, and the insurer’s communications and decisions.

The path from dispute to a bad faith lawsuit typically begins with gathering documentation and making a formal demand for payment or coverage, followed by attempts at negotiation or administrative remedies where appropriate. If those efforts do not resolve the matter, a lawsuit can be filed alleging breach of contract and bad faith practices. Remedies may include recovery of benefits owed under the policy, compensation for related financial losses, and, where permitted by law, additional damages intended to address particularly wrongful conduct. Each case is fact-specific, and a detailed review of the claim file and relevant communications helps determine the strongest path forward.

Need More Information?

Key Terms to Know

Bad Faith Denial

A bad faith denial occurs when an insurer refuses to pay a claim without a reasonable basis or without properly investigating the circumstances surrounding a loss. This can happen when a carrier ignores clear policy language, misapplies coverage rules, or fails to explain its decision in a way that reflects a reasonable analysis of the available facts. Determining whether a denial constitutes bad faith requires examining policy provisions, the claim file, communications between the insurer and insured, and the timeline of the insurer’s actions. Documentation that contradicts the insurer’s stated reasons for denial often plays an important role in evaluating whether a claim of bad faith is justified.

Unreasonable Delay

An unreasonable delay involves an insurer taking an excessive amount of time to investigate, evaluate, or pay a covered claim without legitimate cause. Delays can cause significant financial hardship for policyholders who rely on timely claim resolution to repair property, replace vehicles, or address medical needs. The inquiry into whether a delay is unreasonable considers the complexity of the claim, the insurer’s obligations under the policy, and whether the carrier communicated clear reasons for the timeline. Open, continuous communication and prompt requests for documents are often needed to hold a carrier accountable for prolonged inaction.

Failure to Investigate

Failure to investigate refers to situations where an insurer does not conduct a meaningful or timely review of a claim, neglecting to gather essential facts, obtain relevant records, or consult necessary experts when required. This shortcoming can lead to wrongful denials or inadequate settlements because decisions are made without a proper factual basis. A claim of inadequate investigation often requires showing what information was available to the insurer, what steps a reasonable investigation would have included, and how the lack of investigation prejudiced the policyholder. Preserving evidence of communications and timeline details supports assessing whether investigation efforts were appropriate.

Punitive and Additional Damages

Punitive or additional damages may be available in certain cases where an insurer’s conduct was particularly egregious, intentional, or recklessly indifferent to a policyholder’s rights. These forms of recovery go beyond compensation for actual financial losses and seek to penalize wrongful behavior and deter similar conduct by others. Whether such damages are available depends on statutory provisions, case law, and the specific facts showing the insurer’s state of mind and actions. Claims seeking additional damages require thorough evidence of the insurer’s practices and often involve more extensive discovery and litigation to establish liability at that level.

PRO TIPS

Gather Policy Documents and Proof

Collecting all relevant policy documents, declarations pages, endorsements, prior correspondence, and proof of loss forms is one of the most important steps you can take after a possible bad faith issue arises. Maintaining a chronological file of emails, letters, photographs of damage, repair estimates, medical bills, and notes about phone calls will strengthen any evaluation of whether the insurer handled the claim properly. Providing this organized documentation at the outset allows a focused review of the insurer’s actions and can shorten the time needed to determine appropriate next steps.

Document Communications with the Insurer

Keep detailed records of every interaction with your insurance company, including dates, times, names of representatives, and a summary of what was said or promised during phone calls or in writing. Written confirmation of conversations, copies of letters, and screenshots of online messages can be particularly valuable when verifying timelines and assessing whether the carrier followed through on commitments. Accurate documentation of communications can reveal patterns such as repeated delays, inconsistent explanations, or failures to respond, all of which are relevant when evaluating whether the insurer acted appropriately.

Preserve Evidence of Loss and Damages

Preserving physical and digital evidence of the loss and resulting damages helps demonstrate the extent of your claim and supports challenges to insurer denials or low settlement offers. Keep originals of repair estimates, receipts, invoices, medical records, and any correspondence related to the claim, and consider creating backups to avoid accidental loss. Photographs and contemporaneous notes about the incident and its impact on your life or business help paint a full picture of the harm suffered and are important when presenting the claim or pursuing litigation.

Comparing Legal Approaches for Bad Faith Disputes

When Broader Representation Makes Sense:

Complex Policy Interpretations and Coverage Disputes

Comprehensive representation is often beneficial when policy language is complex or ambiguous and the outcome depends on nuanced contractual interpretation and legal argument. In such matters, the ability to conduct in-depth discovery, consult relevant authorities, and prepare strong written and oral advocacy can significantly influence the resolution. A broader approach can also coordinate multiple legal issues, such as overlapping coverage questions, third-party claims, and related tort matters, ensuring a cohesive strategy across all fronts when the potential stakes are substantial.

Multiple Parties or Coverage Disputes

When coverage disputes involve multiple insurers, third parties, or complex allocations of responsibility, a comprehensive approach helps manage the interplay between different claims and defenses. Coordinating litigation strategy across parties avoids inconsistent positions and ensures that all avenues for recovery are considered and pursued. This level of coordination typically requires sustained attention to procedural matters, discovery planning, and negotiation tactics to protect your interests in each aspect of a multi-faceted dispute.

When a Targeted Approach May Be Appropriate:

Clear Policy Language and Small Claims

A limited or targeted approach can work well when policy language clearly supports your position and the damages involved are modest relative to the time and expense of full litigation. In those cases, a focused demand letter and documentation may prompt the insurer to reconsider without prolonged proceedings. This streamlined path reduces legal costs and can produce a practical resolution when the facts are straightforward and the carrier’s justification for denial is weak or easily rebutted.

Prompt, Cooperative Insurer Responses

If an insurer responds quickly, provides a reasoned explanation, and demonstrates a willingness to correct errors or pay clearly covered benefits, a limited intervention may be effective to reach a fair outcome. Negotiation and mediation can resolve many disputes when the carrier engages in good faith and the policyholder’s damages are well documented. Choosing a less intensive path requires careful assessment of the insurer’s track record and the strength of the underlying claim to avoid forgoing remedies that might be necessary if the carrier later becomes uncooperative.

Common Situations That Lead to Bad Faith Disputes

Denied Claim Without Adequate Explanation

Claims are often denied without a clear factual or legal basis, leaving policyholders without a meaningful explanation for what evidence is missing or what coverage bars apply to the loss, which can be grounds for further scrutiny. When an insurer fails to justify a denial in a way that aligns with the available documentation and policy provisions, policyholders may need to escalate the matter to secure full consideration of their rights and potential remedies.

Unreasonable Delays in Claim Processing

Extended delays in investigating or paying valid claims can compound financial harm and are a frequent source of disputes between insureds and carriers, especially when urgent repairs or medical care are required. Demonstrating that a delay was unreasonable requires showing that the insurer failed to act with due diligence given the facts of the claim and the policyholder’s needs.

Inadequate or Low Settlement Offers

Insurers sometimes make low settlement offers that do not reflect the documented losses or that ignore critical aspects of coverage, prompting policyholders to contest the adequacy of the proposed resolution. When offers persistently fall short of fair compensation and are not explained by reasonable coverage limitations, a formal legal response may be warranted to pursue appropriate recovery.

Bad Faith Insurance Representation in Bethlehem, WV

Why Work with Stephen New & Associates on Bad Faith Matters

Stephen New & Associates brings focused attention to insurance disputes affecting individuals and businesses in Bethlehem and across West Virginia. The firm handles a range of matters from claim denials and delayed payments to complex coverage litigation and tort claims tied to bad faith conduct. Clients receive clear explanations about policy terms, realistic options for negotiation or litigation, and consistent updates as a claim progresses. With local knowledge of state procedures and an emphasis on careful preparation, the firm seeks to ensure that policyholders understand their rights and available remedies.

The firm’s approach emphasizes prompt communication, thorough review of claim files, and practical problem solving aimed at resolving disputes efficiently when possible and pursuing full remedies when necessary. From demand letters to courtroom filings, the strategy is tailored to the specifics of each case and guided by the facts in the file. For anyone facing an insurer whose conduct appears unjustified, consulting about documented communications, policy language, and the scope of losses helps determine the best path forward and preserves important deadlines and evidence.

Schedule a Consultation with Our Bethlehem Team

People Also Search For

bad faith insurance claims

bad faith lawyer Bethlehem WV

insurance litigation West Virginia

denied insurance claim help

first party bad faith

UM UIM claim assistance

property claim denial attorney

commercial insurance dispute counsel

Related Services

FAQS

What is considered insurance bad faith in West Virginia?

Insurance bad faith in West Virginia generally refers to insurer conduct that breaches contractual duties or violates statutory obligations in a way that is unreasonable, dishonest, or in disregard of the insured’s rights. Examples include denying a claim without a reasonable basis, failing to investigate in a timely way, refusing to communicate important information, or making payment decisions unsupported by the claim file. Assessing bad faith requires comparing the insurer’s actions to what a reasonable carrier would have done under similar circumstances and reviewing the insurer’s internal file and communications. Not every denial or dispute constitutes bad faith; many claim disagreements arise from differing interpretations of policy language or disputed facts. To evaluate whether a denial crosses the line, it is necessary to review the policy terms, the evidence submitted, the insurer’s stated reasons for its decision, and whether the insurer gave the policyholder a fair opportunity to respond. A careful review of documentation and timelines typically clarifies whether further action is warranted.

How do I know if my claim denial is unreasonable?

A denial may be unreasonable if it lacks a factual or legal basis, disregards available evidence, or is issued without a proper investigation. Other signs include inconsistent explanations from the insurer, failure to provide requested documents or reasons for denial, and a pattern of delay or miscommunication that harms the insured’s ability to secure timely resolution. Evidence that contradicts the insurer’s stated basis for denial is particularly important when assessing reasonableness. To determine whether a denial is unreasonable in your case, gather all correspondence, claim forms, estimates, and records and review them against the policy provisions. An evaluation of the claim file and insurer communications helps reveal whether the carrier followed standard procedures and whether any omissions or misrepresentations suggest improper handling. This fact-based analysis informs whether to pursue negotiation, administrative remedies, or litigation.

What remedies are available if an insurer acted in bad faith?

Remedies for bad faith conduct can include recovery of benefits owed under the policy and compensation for related economic losses caused by the insurer’s actions, such as out-of-pocket expenses and consequential damages. In certain circumstances and depending on statute and case law, additional damages intended to address wrongful conduct may be available, though availability depends on the facts and governing legal standards. The initial step is documenting the precise financial harms and connecting them to the insurer’s conduct. The path to remedy often begins with demanding payment or correction of the claim decision, followed by litigation if necessary to secure relief. Courts will examine the insurer’s handling, the reasons given, and the policy terms to determine liability and appropriate compensation. Each case is unique, and a careful assessment helps identify the likely remedies and procedural steps needed to pursue them effectively.

How long do I have to file a bad faith claim in West Virginia?

Statutes of limitation and other deadlines vary by claim type and jurisdiction, so it is important to act promptly when you suspect bad faith. In West Virginia, the timing for filing a lawsuit can depend on whether the claim is framed as a breach of contract, a statutory claim, or a tort-based cause of action. Delays in pursuing a claim can jeopardize the ability to recover, particularly if key documents or witnesses become unavailable over time. Because the applicable deadline can be affected by factors such as the date of denial, discovery of the insurer’s wrongful conduct, and any tolling events, seeking an early review of your claim file and communications helps preserve rights. Prompt consultation ensures that important deadlines are identified and that evidence is preserved while memories and records remain fresh.

Will attempting negotiation or mediation hurt my bad faith claim?

Attempting negotiation or mediation typically does not harm a bad faith claim and can often resolve disputes more quickly and cost-effectively than litigation. Insurers may respond to thorough documentation and a well-presented demand by correcting a denial or increasing a settlement offer, and structured negotiation processes can produce timely resolutions without the expense and delay of court proceedings. Keeping negotiations documented and preserving all communications helps maintain transparency if a claim proceeds. Mediation can be especially useful when both parties want to avoid the unpredictability and time commitment of trial, and it allows for creative solutions tailored to the particular circumstances of the loss. If negotiations fail, preserved records of settlement discussions and offers can support litigation, but the decision to settle should be based on a careful assessment of the strengths and limits of the case and the client’s goals.

Should I accept the insurer’s low settlement offer to avoid litigation?

Accepting a low settlement offer may provide quick resolution, but it can also foreclose later claims for the full value of losses or for additional remedies related to bad faith conduct. Before accepting any offer, review the proposed terms carefully to ensure all present and potential future damages are accounted for, including indirect costs and ongoing expenses. A considered decision weighs the certainty of a prompt payment against the risk of receiving less than what is recoverable through further negotiation or litigation. If the offer does not reflect documented losses or fails to address damages caused by insurer misconduct, it may be appropriate to counter or to pursue additional remedies. Seeking an evaluation of the offer in light of the claim file and legal options helps determine whether settlement is in your best interest or whether continuing to press the claim is more appropriate.

What evidence helps support a bad faith claim?

Key evidence for a bad faith claim includes the insurance policy itself, all correspondence with the insurer, claim forms, estimates, invoices, photographs of damage, medical records, and notes of phone calls or in-person conversations. Internal insurer documents, such as claim notes or reports, can also be revealing, particularly if they show inconsistent reasoning or a lack of investigation. Chronological organization of these items strengthens the ability to demonstrate when and how the insurer acted. Additional helpful materials include records showing financial harm caused by the insurer’s actions, such as receipts for emergency repairs, rental car expenses, or medical bills incurred due to delayed payments. Witness statements, expert opinions regarding the value of loss or coverage interpretation, and evidence of industry standards for claim handling may also support a claim and highlight departures from reasonable practices.

Can businesses bring bad faith claims for denied commercial coverage?

Yes, businesses can bring bad faith claims when an insurer improperly denies, delays, or underpays coverage for commercial losses. Commercial policies often involve complex endorsements, multiple insured interests, and business interruption or liability components, and disputes over scope of coverage or valuation can have significant financial consequences for a business. Where an insurer’s conduct prejudices a business’s ability to recover timely compensation, legal remedies may be pursued to address economic harms and contractual breaches. Because commercial cases can involve specialized policy terms and higher stakes, a careful examination of policy language, loss documentation, and the insurer’s handling of large or multifaceted claims is important. Coordinated legal strategies that address allocation of damages, mitigation efforts, and potential third-party exposures help protect the business’s financial position while pursuing appropriate relief.

How does bad faith litigation differ from a simple coverage dispute?

A bad faith claim focuses on improper conduct by the insurer beyond a simple dispute about coverage or facts, while a coverage dispute is primarily about whether a particular loss falls within the terms of the policy. Coverage disputes may be resolved by interpreting policy language and assessing evidence of loss, but bad faith claims require showing that the insurer acted unreasonably, dishonestly, or without proper investigation in reaching its decision. In essence, bad faith adds a layer of alleged improper conduct to the underlying contract dispute. Proving bad faith typically involves establishing both that the insured was entitled to coverage or benefits and that the insurer’s handling of the claim fell below acceptable standards in a way that caused additional harm. This often requires more extensive discovery into internal insurer files and a demonstration of the causal link between the carrier’s conduct and the policyholder’s damages, which is distinct from the narrower inquiry of coverage alone.

How do I begin the process of pursuing a bad faith claim with Stephen New & Associates?

To begin pursuing a bad faith claim with Stephen New & Associates, start by collecting all relevant documents including the insurance policy, correspondence, estimates, invoices, and any records of communications with the insurer. Contact the firm by phone at 304-355-5565 or through the website to arrange an initial review, during which the team will assess the claim file and advise on reasonable next steps based on the facts presented. Early preservation of documents and a clear timeline of events aid in the evaluation process. During the initial consultation, the firm will explain potential remedies, typical timelines, and options for negotiation or litigation tailored to the specifics of your situation. If formal representation is appropriate, the firm will proceed with demand letters, attempts at resolution, or filing suit while maintaining communication about strategy and anticipated milestones, keeping you informed so that decisions align with your goals.

All Services in

Explore our complete legal services