5 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 427b
Insurance — Indemnity — Insurer’s appeal of judgment entered in favor of insurance agency in agency’s third party action seeking contribution and indemnification for judgment entered against it in an action by insureds to recover deposit paid to procure vehicle insurance which was subsequently cancelled because of premium dispute — Because insurer provided insurance coverage to insureds until actual cancellation of policy, insureds received a benefit, and insurer is entitled to be compensated to the extent of that benefit — Error to enter judgment in favor of agency in full amount of insureds’ deposit, plus costs — On remand, court should make determination regarding length of time insureds were provided with coverage as well as value/cost of such coverage
UNION AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. AMERICAN CRUISES, TOURS AND TRAVEL, INC., Appellee. 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Appellate Division. Case No. 96-439AP. February 13, 1998. An Appeal from the County Court for Dade County, Honorable Marvin H. Gillman. Counsel: Douglas H. Stein, for Appellant/Petitioner. Pablo E. Lense, for Appellee/Respondent.
(Before JOEL H. BROWN and MAXINE COHEN LANDO, JJ.)
(Maxine Cohen Lando) Union American Insurance Company appeals the lower court’s decision finding for the Appellee, Caribe Insurance Agency.
This Appeal involves a Third Party Complaint submitted by Caribe Insurance Agency (Hereinafter “Caribe”) for contribution and indemnification from Union American Insurance Company (Hereinafter “Union American”). In the County Court, American Cruises Tours and Travel, Inc. a/k/a Rubin Garcia, (Hereinafter, “American Cruises”) sued Caribe for the return of $1,500.00 paid by American Cruises to Caribe for procuring insurance through Union American Insurance.
On February 16, 1995, American Cruises applied for “for Hire” vehicle insurance through Caribe Insurance, and was given an estimated quote by them of $4,500.00. Based on the above, American Cruises gave Caribe a $1,575.00 deposit, which Caribe immediately forwarded to Union American, the insurer.
On February 20, 1995, Union American issued a policy and declaration sheet to Plaintiff stating that the total premium would be $13,787.00 rather than the initial $4,500.00 quoted, and requested a balance. On March 2, 1995, Union American requested in a letter to American Cruises that they submit a copy of the motor vehicle’s registration. In addition, Union American requested an additional payment of $9,287.00 which was now due given the error by Caribe Insurance in the previously quoted premium.
On April 3, 1995, having received no response from American Cruises, a notice was sent to them, canceling the policy effective May 21, 1995.
American Cruises sued Caribe for the return of its $1,575.00 deposit. The trial court entered its judgment against Caribe in the amount of $1,692.00 (deposit plus interest and cost). Caribe moved for a rehearing which was denied. Specifically, the trial court found that Union American had improperly relied on § 627.7282, Fla. Stat. (1996) and that the options provided for by the statute were not available in this case. The Court further found that the Plaintiff’s application for insurance was never “accepted by the insurer as offered”, …[and]… “therefore a contract of insurance was never validly issued although the Plaintiff may have been insured under the binder agreement had an accident or loss occurred.”
Caribe filed its Third Party Complaint against Union American seeking contribution and indemnification for the judgment entered in favor of American Cruises. A trial on the third party action was held on October 9, 1996. Union American made an ore tenus motion for summary judgment which the court denied, finding that “there was no understanding between the insured and the carrier through its agency which is Caribe Insurance Agency that they were getting insurance on this vehicle for the approximate price they agreed upon.” On October 25, 1996, the trial court entered its judgment in favor of Caribe in the amount of $1,575.00 plus costs. This Appeal ensued.
However, testimony at trial proved, and it was agreed by the parties, that Union American provided insurance coverage for American Cruises, until the actual cancellation of the policy. A contract did in fact exist between American Cruises and Union American. The Appellee’s counsel stated at trial that the insured “had ninety days worth of insurance, no question about it” [R.13]. There was also further testimony from an employee of Appellant who stated that American Cruises did in fact have insurance coverage up until May 21, 1995. [R. 50]. Therefore, this coverage provided a benefit to American Cruises, and the Appellant is entitled to be compensated to that extent.
This Court finds that despite the dispute concerning the premium amount, the insured did receive a benefit and was enriched to a point that allowed them to operate their business. In an evidentiary hearing, the lower court should make a determination regarding the length of time that the insured was provided with coverage as well as the value/cost of such coverage.
The order of the lower court is REVERSED AND REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. (JOEL H. BROWN, J., Concurs.)
* * *