Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-66.1 (2026)

Remedy for arbitrary refusal of motor vehicle insurance claim

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Whenever any insurance company licensed in this Commonwealth to write insurance as defined in § 38.2-124 denies, refuses or fails to pay to its insured a property damage claim or medical expense benefit or loss of income benefit claim under the provisions of a policy of motor vehicle insurance and it is subsequently found by the judge of a court of proper jurisdiction that such denial, refusal or failure to pay was not made in good faith, the company shall be liable to the insured in an amount double the amount of the judgment, plus interest from 30 days after the date the claim was submitted in writing to the insurer or its authorized agent, together with reasonable attorney fees and expenses.

B. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection A, whenever any insurance company licensed in this Commonwealth to write insurance as defined in § 38.2-124 denies, refuses or fails to pay to a third party claimant, on behalf of an insured to whom such company has issued a policy of motor vehicle liability insurance, a claim of $3,500 or less made by such third party claimant and if the judge of a court of proper jurisdiction finds that the insured is liable for the claim, the third party claimant shall have a cause of action against the insurance company. If the judge finds that such denial, refusal or failure to pay was not made in good faith, the company, in addition to the liability assumed by the company under the provisions of the insured's policy of motor vehicle liability insurance, shall be liable to the third party claimant in an amount double the amount of the judgment awarded the third party claimant, together with reasonable attorney fees and expenses.

C. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections A and B, whenever any person who has furnished proof of financial responsibility in lieu of obtaining a policy or policies of motor vehicle liability insurance pursuant to the provisions of Title 46.2 or any person who is required and has failed to furnish such proof pursuant to the provisions of Title 46.2 denies, refuses, or fails to pay to a claimant a claim of $3,500 or less made by such claimant as a result of a motor vehicle accident, and if the trial judge of a court of proper jurisdiction finds that such denial, refusal, or failure to pay was not made in good faith, such person shall be liable to the claimant in an amount double the amount of the judgment, together with reasonable attorney fees and expenses.

For the purposes of this subsection, "person" means and includes any natural person, firm, partnership, association, or corporation.

D. Whenever any insurance company licensed in the Commonwealth to write motor vehicle insurance as defined in § 38.2-124 (i) denies, refuses, fails to pay, or fails to make a timely and reasonable settlement offer to its insured under the provisions of any uninsured or underinsured motorist benefits coverage in a policy of motor vehicle insurance applicable to the insured after the insured has become legally entitled to recover or (ii) after all applicable liability policy limits and underlying uninsured and underinsured motorists benefits have been tendered or paid, rejects a reasonable settlement demand made by the insured within the policy's coverage limits for uninsured or underinsured motorist benefits or fails to respond within a reasonable time after being presented with such demand after the insured has become legally entitled to recover, and it is subsequently found by a court of proper jurisdiction that such denial, refusal, or failure to timely pay or failure to make a timely and reasonable settlement offer, rejection of a reasonable settlement demand, or failure to timely accept a reasonable settlement demand was not made in good faith, in addition to the amount due and owing by the insurance company to its insured on the judgment against the tortfeasor, the insurance company shall also be liable to the insured in an amount up to double the amount of the judgment obtained against the underinsured motorist, uninsured motorist, immune motorist, unknown owner or operator, or released defendant in the underlying personal injury or wrongful death action, not to exceed $500,000, together with reasonable attorney fees for bringing a claim under this subsection, and all costs and expenses incurred by the insured to secure a judgment against the tortfeasor, and interest from 30 days after the date of such denial or failure or the date the reasonable settlement demand was submitted in writing. The insured or the insured's representative may seek adjudication of a claim that the insurance company did not act in good faith as a posttrial motion before the court in which the underlying personal injury or wrongful death judgment was obtained or as a separate action against the company. If the insured or the insured's representative seeks adjudication as a separate action and the underlying judgment is appealed, any action filed under this subsection shall be stayed by the court pending final resolution of the appeal of the underlying judgment.

E. Prior to making a demand under this section, the claimant shall provide notice to the insurer 45 days prior to making such demand along with information and documentation sufficient for the insurer to assess the liability and damages of the claimant.

F. There shall be no action for bad faith under this section if the insurer tenders to the claimant the lesser of the (i) applicable limits of the policy or (ii) monetary amount demanded by the claimant either prior to the insurer's receipt of a settlement offer from the claimant or within 45 days of the insurer's receipt of the notice of the claimant's intent to make a claim and accompanying information and documentation pursuant to subsection E.

For the purposes of this section, the term "legally entitled to recover" means the point in time when liability to the uninsured or underinsured motorist insurance company's insured has become reasonably foreseeable without necessity of a judgment by its insured against an uninsured or underinsured motorist, an unknown owner or operator, or an immune motorist.

1977, c. 621; 1979, c. 521; 1980, c. 437; 1989, c. 698; 1991, c. 155; 1997, c. 401; 2002, c. 631; 2024, c. 781.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2023 · leading case: Manu v. GEICO Cas. Co., 798 S.E.2d 598 (Va. 2017).
Manu v. GEICO Cas. Co., 798 S.E.2d 598 (Va. 2017). · cites it 82× “Manu alleged that pursuant to Code § 8.01-66.1, GEICO was "charged with the duty to evaluate, adjust, and settle [uninsured motorist] claims against it in 'good faith,' " and, "notwithstanding said duty, GEICO's failure to settle plaintiff's claim within the $25,000 policy limit…”
Nationwide Mut. Ins. v. St. John, 524 S.E.2d 649 (Va. 2000). · cites it 38× “His mother scheduled an appointment with his family physician and with a chiropractor who had treated Joel's father.”
Chevalier-Seawell v. Mangum, 90 Va. Cir. 420 (Norfolk Cir. Ct. 2015). · cites it 26× “Va. Code § 8.01-66.1 and Pre-trial Failure To Act in Good Faith The parties contest the availability of a remedy under Va.”
Satterfield v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co., 287 F. Supp. 3d 1285 (W.D. Okla. 2018). “2d 598 (2017) (recognizing that Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-66.1 (D)(1) provides remedy to insureds against insurers who arbitrarily refuse to pay claims owed under terms of insurance contract; in cases involving UM coverage, such duty is triggered when insured obtains judgment against…”
Eanes v. Shepherd, 33 B.R. 984 (W.D. Va. 1983). · cites it 2× “Despite appellees’ contention, this court finds that Virginia Code § 8.01-66.1 et seq. represents specially created exemptions to the general rule that contingent personal injury claims are not subject to creditor process.”
A & E Supply Co. v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins., 612 F. Supp. 760 (W.D. Va. 1985). “The prohibition against acts of bad faith applies to claims between the insured and the insurer and to third party claims.”
Manu v. GEICO Cas. Co., 93 Va. Cir. 59 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2016). · cites it 37× “Bad Faith Under Virginia Code § 8.01-66.1 (D)(1) and Virginia Code § 38.”
Conner v. Glasgow, 92 Va. Cir. 191 (Spotsylvania Cir. Ct. 2015). · cites it 3× “In Chevalier, Judge Hall undertakes an analysis of the current case law on the issue of whether a UIM carrier may be the subject of a pretrial failure to act in good faith motion under the authority of Virginia Code § 8.01-66.1 and reaches a conclusion that such an action may be…”
Copenhaver v. Davis, 31 Va. Cir. 227 (Louisa Cir. Ct. 1993). · cites it 2× “Now GEICO, for purposes of argument, conceding § 8.01-66.1(D) may create a remedy for pre-trial bad faith behavior, contends that it does not create a corresponding duty to act in good faith.”
Coker v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 45 Va. Cir. 510 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 1998). · cites it 3× “2-209 (only attorney’s fees allowed); Va. Code § 8.01-66.1 (only attorney’s fees and interest allowed); and Va.”
Call v. Geico Advantage Ins. Co. (E.D. Va. 2023). · cites it 9× “Allegations of bad faith are implicit in § 8.01-66.1(A). Supp. at 7-8.) However, Plaintiff clarifies that in the matter before this Court, he does not intend to bring a breach of contract claim.”
Copenhaver v. Davis, 29 Va. Cir. 121 (Louisa Cir. Ct. 1992). · cites it 2× “A careful review of § 8.01-66.1(D)(1), its legislative history, and its interstatutory relationship provides no indication of a legislative intent to exclude underinsurance contracts from the general provisions of the section.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-66.1(A) — 6 cases
Nationwide Mut. Ins. v. St. John, 524 S.E.2d 649 (Va. 2000). “His mother scheduled an appointment with his family physician and with a chiropractor who had treated Joel's father.”
Manu v. GEICO Cas. Co., 798 S.E.2d 598 (Va. 2017). “Manu alleged that pursuant to Code § 8.01-66.1, GEICO was "charged with the duty to evaluate, adjust, and settle [uninsured motorist] claims against it in 'good faith,' " and, "notwithstanding said duty, GEICO's failure to settle plaintiff's claim within the $25,000 policy limit…”
Chevalier-Seawell v. Mangum, 90 Va. Cir. 420 (Norfolk Cir. Ct. 2015). “Va. Code § 8.01-66.1 and Pre-trial Failure To Act in Good Faith The parties contest the availability of a remedy under Va.”
Call v. Geico Advantage Ins. Co. (E.D. Va. 2023). “Allegations of bad faith are implicit in § 8.01-66.1(A). Supp. at 7-8.) However, Plaintiff clarifies that in the matter before this Court, he does not intend to bring a breach of contract claim.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-66.1(D) — 5 cases
Manu v. GEICO Cas. Co., 798 S.E.2d 598 (Va. 2017). “Manu alleged that pursuant to Code § 8.01-66.1, GEICO was "charged with the duty to evaluate, adjust, and settle [uninsured motorist] claims against it in 'good faith,' " and, "notwithstanding said duty, GEICO's failure to settle plaintiff's claim within the $25,000 policy limit…”
Copenhaver v. Davis, 31 Va. Cir. 227 (Louisa Cir. Ct. 1993). “Now GEICO, for purposes of argument, conceding § 8.01-66.1(D) may create a remedy for pre-trial bad faith behavior, contends that it does not create a corresponding duty to act in good faith.”
Chevalier-Seawell v. Mangum, 90 Va. Cir. 420 (Norfolk Cir. Ct. 2015). “Va. Code § 8.01-66.1 and Pre-trial Failure To Act in Good Faith The parties contest the availability of a remedy under Va.”
Manu v. GEICO Cas. Co., 93 Va. Cir. 59 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2016). “Bad Faith Under Virginia Code § 8.01-66.1 (D)(1) and Virginia Code § 38.”
Gleason v. Allstate Ins., 42 Va. Cir. 239 (Loudoun Cir. Ct. 1997).
— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-66.1(D)(1) — 6 cases
Manu v. GEICO Cas. Co., 798 S.E.2d 598 (Va. 2017). “Manu alleged that pursuant to Code § 8.01-66.1, GEICO was "charged with the duty to evaluate, adjust, and settle [uninsured motorist] claims against it in 'good faith,' " and, "notwithstanding said duty, GEICO's failure to settle plaintiff's claim within the $25,000 policy limit…”
Chevalier-Seawell v. Mangum, 90 Va. Cir. 420 (Norfolk Cir. Ct. 2015). “Va. Code § 8.01-66.1 and Pre-trial Failure To Act in Good Faith The parties contest the availability of a remedy under Va.”
Manu v. GEICO Cas. Co., 93 Va. Cir. 59 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2016). “Bad Faith Under Virginia Code § 8.01-66.1 (D)(1) and Virginia Code § 38.”
Conner v. Glasgow, 92 Va. Cir. 191 (Spotsylvania Cir. Ct. 2015). “In Chevalier, Judge Hall undertakes an analysis of the current case law on the issue of whether a UIM carrier may be the subject of a pretrial failure to act in good faith motion under the authority of Virginia Code § 8.01-66.1 and reaches a conclusion that such an action may be…”
Copenhaver v. Davis, 29 Va. Cir. 121 (Louisa Cir. Ct. 1992). “A careful review of § 8.01-66.1(D)(1), its legislative history, and its interstatutory relationship provides no indication of a legislative intent to exclude underinsurance contracts from the general provisions of the section.”
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.