O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 33-34-6 (2019)

Selection of motor vehicle repair facility

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Statute text

(a) Subject to the provisions of subsection (b) of this Code section, no insurer shall represent to a person making a claim under a motor vehicle insurance policy that the use of or the failure to use a particular repair facility or particular repair facilities may result in the nonpayment of a claim.

(b) No insurer shall require a person making a claim under a motor vehicle insurance policy to use a particular repair facility or particular repair facilities in order to settle a claim if the person making the claim can obtain the repair work on the motor vehicle at the same cost from another source.

History

(Code 1981, § 33-34-6, enacted by Ga. L. 1991, p. 1608, § 1.12; Ga. L. 1992, p. 2464, § 2; Ga. L. 1999, p. 834, § 2.)

Annotations

Law reviews. - For annual survey of insurance law, see 56 Mercer L. Rev. 253 (2004).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

No private cause of action. - Dismissal of an auto repair shop's claim against an insurance company for violation of the Georgia Motor Vehicle Accident Reparations Act, O.C.G.A. § 33-34-1 et seq., was appropriate because there was no private cause of action under O.C.G.A. § 33-34-6. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Hernandez Auto Painting & Body Works, 312 Ga. App. 756, 719 S.E.2d 597 (2011).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR. - What constitutes bad faith on part of insurer rendering it liable for statutory penalty imposed for bad faith in failure to pay, or delay in paying, insured's claim - Particular grounds for denial of claim: risks, causes, and extent of loss, injury, disability, or death, 123 A.L.R.5th 259.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 137 cases, 1983–2011 · leading case: Binns v. Metro. Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth., 308 S.E.2d 674 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Binns v. Metro. Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth., 308 S.E.2d 674 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 46× “Binns, plaintiff below, filed suit against the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) seeking compensatory damages for personal injuries and, in addition, punitive damages pursuant to OCGA § 33-34-6 (Code Ann. § 56-3406b). The jury returned a verdict awarding Binns…”
Int'l Indem. Co. v. Coachman, 351 S.E.2d 224 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 36× “Among its 28 enumerations of error, appellant raises the general grounds and numerous evidentiary rulings that are tangentially related to the general grounds.”
Johnson v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins., 338 S.E.2d 687 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 26× “During a jury trial, a directed verdict was granted to Johnson as to the amount of benefits stipulated by the parties, and the jury returned a verdict in favor of Johnson for 25% statutory penalties as provided by OCGA § 33-34-6 (b) and $1.00 in punitive damages under OCGA §…”
Int'l Indem. Co. v. Terrell, 344 S.E.2d 239 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 20× “Appellee’s motion was granted and he was awarded $45,000 as additional no-fault benefits along with interest from the date of demand to the date of judgment less the sixty-day statutory exclusionary period, as provided in OCGA § 33-34-6 (c). The $45,000 had in fact been tendered…”
Hufstetler v. Int'l Indem. Co., 359 S.E.2d 399 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 24× “International Indemnity answered asserting as a defense Hufstetler’s failure to provide it with reasonable proof of her loss pursuant to OCGA § 33-34-6 (b); International Indemnity also counterclaimed alleging abuse of process.”
Lawson v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 347 S.E.2d 565 (Ga. 1986). · cites it 28× “Nevertheless, Lawson brought this action against State Farm for statutory penalties, punitive damages, and attorney's fees pursuant to OCGA § 33-34-6 (b) and (c) for State Farm's failure to pay his claims within the time period required by the statute.”
Hartford Fire Ins. v. Rowland, 351 S.E.2d 650 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 21× “In addition to damages for breach of the insurance contract, plaintiff sought *214 statutory damages under OCGA § 33-34-6 (b), (c). Plaintiff also sought general damages and punitive damages based on a tort claim for Hartford’s willful failure to pay under the insurance contract.”
Strickland v. Am. Home Assurance Co., 367 S.E.2d 241 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 28× “The record reveals that appellant subsequent to her December 17, 1985 accident, contacted Parker-Kaufman Realtors and Insurers (Parker-Kaufman) in mid-January to pursue benefits under the automobile policy issued to her by appellee.”
Terry v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 422 S.E.2d 212 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 16× “On February 5, 1991, plaintiff brought this action alleging, inter alia, that defendant in bad faith refused to pay certain medical expenses in a timely manner and seeking to recover penalties and punitive damages pursuant to OCGA § 33-34-6 for defendant’s alleged failure to…”
Cotton States Mut. Ins. v. McFather, 309 S.E.2d 799 (Ga. 1984). · cites it 12× “1 Such a time extension was needed because OCGA § 33-34-6 (b) (Code Ann. § 56-3406b) requires that no-fault benefits be paid within 30 days of a demand and proof of loss by the insured.”
Falagian v. Leader Nat'l Ins., 307 S.E.2d 698 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 12× “Held: The main issue presented by plaintiff is whether an insurer which is already in violation of OCGA § 33-34-6 (b) (formerly Code Ann. § 56-3406b (b) (Ga.”
Smith v. Gov't Employees Ins. Co., 347 S.E.2d 245 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 20× “Smith argues that the Georgia Motor Vehicle Accident Reparations Act (the Act), OCGA Ch.”
Show all 137 citing cases →
— 33-34-6(a) — 1 case
Wood v. New York Life Ins. Co., 783 F.2d 990 (11th Cir. 1986).
— 33-34-6(b) — 15 cases
Lyndon B. Johnson v. Occidental Fire & Cas. Co. of North Carolina, 954 F.2d 1581 (11th Cir. 1992).
Colwell v. Voyager Cas. Ins., 309 S.E.2d 617 (Ga. 1983).
Albert Jones, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. The Auto. Ins. Co. of Hartford, Connecticut, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee, 917 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir. 1990).
Terrolyn A. Jowers v. Nationwide Ins. Co., 832 F.2d 1246 (11th Cir. 1988).
Joseph Alton Bowers v. Cont'l Ins. Co., 753 F.2d 1574 (11th Cir. 1985).
— 33-34-6(b)(c) — 1 case
in Re: Mindis Metals, Inc. D/B/A Mindis Recycling (Tex. App. 2004).
— 33-34-6(c) — 8 cases
Albert Jones, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. The Auto. Ins. Co. of Hartford, Connecticut, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee, 917 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir. 1990).
Stryker v. City of Atlanta, 738 F. Supp. 1423 (N.D. Ga. 1990).
Jones v. Auto. Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn., 698 F. Supp. 226 (N.D. Ga. 1988).
Gerlinde G. Ryan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 934 F.2d 276 (11th Cir. 1991).
Terrolyn A. Jowers v. Nationwide Ins. Co., 832 F.2d 1246 (11th Cir. 1988).
— 33-34-6(e) — 1 case
Albert Jones, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. The Auto. Ins. Co. of Hartford, Connecticut, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee, 917 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir. 1990).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.