Although insurance agents and brokers accept many duties owed to their customers, they are not guarantors of every problem that may face an insured. In Boyer v. Wells, No. B205345 (Cal.App. Dist.2 08/29/2008), a case not officially published, the California Court of Appeal ruled that an insurance agent only needs to fulfill duties actually assumed and that unless the agent makes specific promises, the agent is not obligated to an insured. In Boyer v. Wells, the insured failed to pay his premium and tried to blame cancellation on the agent who failed to force him to pay. Generally, “an insurance agent does not have a duty to volunteer to an insured that the latter should procure additional or different insurance coverage…” The rule changes when the agent misrepresents the nature, extent or scope of the coverage; the insured requests a particular type or extent of coverage; or the agent assumes an additional duty by either express agreement or by “holding himself out” as having expertise in a given field of insurance being sought by the insured.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free
PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader.


  • All news coverage, best practices, and in-depth analysis.
  • Educational webcasts, resources from industry leaders, and informative newsletters.
  • Other award-winning websites including and

Already have an account?


© 2023 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.



Join PropertyCasualty360

Don’t miss crucial news and insights you need to make informed decisions for your P&C insurance business. Join now!

  • Unlimited access to - your roadmap to thriving in a disrupted environment
  • Access to other award-winning ALM websites including, and
  • Exclusive discounts on PropertyCasualty360, National Underwriter, Claims and ALM events

Already have an account? Sign In Now
Join PropertyCasualty360

Copyright © 2023 ALM Global, LLC. All Rights Reserved.