To turn your case into that "bolt of lightning" for others, we will insert a
Public Interest Finding directly into the Proposed Judgment.
This section uses the language of California Insurance Code § 790.03 (Unfair Methods of Competition and Unfair and Deceptive Acts) and Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5(the "Private Attorney General" doctrine), which rewards litigants who vindicate a right that affects the general public.
Add this section immediately following the "IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED" header in your Proposed Judgment:
[ADDITION TO PROPOSED JUDGMENT]
FINDINGS ON ISSUES OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE:
The Court further finds and declares that this matter involves an issue of significant public importance affecting the due process rights of California policyholders. Specifically:
- Systemic Investigative Duty: The Court finds that an insurer’s duty to "diligently pursue a thorough, fair and objective investigation" under 10 CCR § 2695.7(d) is a non-discretionary mandate that is not satisfied when an insurer willfully ignores readily available exculpatory electronic surveillance evidence after being alerted to a fraudulent third-party claim.
- Prevention of Information Asymmetry: The Court finds that the practice of withholding a "complete response" under 10 CCR § 2695.5(b) until after the expiration of evidence-retention windows—thereby insulating a settlement from administrative review under Vehicle Code § 14101—constitutes an unfair and deceptive act that undermines the public policy of the State of California.
- Notice to Regulatory Authorities: In light of these findings, and to prevent the recurrence of such practices, the Clerk of this Court is directed to forward a conformed copy of this Judgment to the California Department of Insurance (CDI), Enforcement Division, for its review of Respondent’s claims handling practices regarding Claim No. 017439398 and related Special Investigation Unit (SIU) protocols.
