The California Court of Appeals explored the issue of the responsibility of an insurance agent is the case of Williams v. Hilb, Rogal & Hobbs Ins. Services of California, Inc., 177 Cal.App.4th 624, 98 Cal.Rptr.3d 910 (2nd Dist. 2009).
Insurance agents like to argue that they do not have a duty to advise a client that it should procure additional or different insurance coverage. However, the Williams case makes it clear that when an agent assumes additional duties by holding himself out as an expert he can be held liable for not procuring appropriate coverage.
This just makes sense. Most folks rely on their agent to tell them what coverage they need, particularly in the commercial insurance field, but also in the consumer area. Agents are in a far better position than potential insureds to know what types and amounts of insurance coverage should be in place. To be sure, the agent cannot force a client to buy any type of coverage (just like a lawyer cannot force a client to follow his or her advice or a doctor cannot force a patient to stick to a diet) but the notion that insurance agent’s are nothing but salespeople is an outrage.