UM/UIM Demand Letter - North Dakota

UM/UIM (UNINSURED/UNDERINSURED MOTORIST) DEMAND LETTER

State of North Dakota

[LAW FIRM LETTERHEAD]

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
SETTLEMENT COMMUNICATION — FOR RESOLUTION PURPOSES ONLY
PROTECTED UNDER N.D. R. EV. 408 AND F.R.E. 408

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
AND VIA EMAIL TO: [________________________________]

Date: [__/__/____]

[INSURANCE COMPANY NAME]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[City], [State] [Zip]

Attention: [________________________________], [________________________________]
Re: UM/UIM POLICY LIMITS DEMAND — NORTH DAKOTA

Dear [________________________________]:

I. INTRODUCTION AND NATURE OF DEMAND

This firm represents [________________________________] ("our client") regarding a claim for [uninsured / underinsured] motorist benefits arising from a motor vehicle collision on [__/__/____] in [________________________________], North Dakota. This letter constitutes a formal demand for payment of the full UM/UIM policy limits of $[________________________________].

North Dakota is a mandatory no-fault / add-on PIP state under N.D. Cent. Code Chapter 26.1-41. Our client's PIP benefits have been [exhausted / substantially exhausted], and our client's injuries satisfy North Dakota's tort threshold permitting recovery in tort. The tortfeasor's liability coverage is insufficient to compensate our client's damages. Your insured is therefore entitled to the full benefit of the UM/UIM coverage purchased and required by North Dakota law.

II. NORTH DAKOTA UM/UIM LAW — CONTROLLING AUTHORITY

A. Mandatory Coverage Requirements

North Dakota mandates UM/UIM coverage under N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-40-15.2 and § 26.1-40-15.3. Every automobile liability policy issued or delivered in this state must provide uninsured motorist coverage of at least $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident. This minimum cannot be waived. Higher limits up to $100,000/$300,000 (or equivalent combined single limit) must be made available upon request.

B. Anti-Stacking Provision — Critical North Dakota Rule

N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-40-15.2 expressly prohibits stacking of UM/UIM limits across multiple vehicles or policies. Regardless of the number of vehicles on the policy, premiums paid, or policies involved, the maximum UM/UIM recovery in any single accident is the highest applicable per-person limit under any one policy. Counsel must evaluate carefully whether multiple policies may nonetheless provide coverage under § 26.1-40-15.4 (priority-of-payment rules governing which policy pays first when coverage exists under more than one policy).

C. North Dakota No-Fault PIP Framework and Tort Threshold

North Dakota operates a mandatory no-fault / add-on system under N.D. Cent. Code Chapter 26.1-41 (Auto Accident Reparations Act). Every insured must carry basic no-fault benefits of at least $30,000 per person per accident covering:

• Reasonable and necessary medical expenses
• Work loss up to $150 per week (statutory floor; higher limits available)
• Replacement services up to $15 per day

Tort threshold: An injured party may bring a tort claim — and access UM/UIM benefits — when the claimant's medical expenses exceed $2,500 or when the injury results in death, permanent serious disfigurement, or serious and permanent injury. See N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-41-08. Our client's injuries clearly satisfy this threshold because [________________________________].

D. Exhaustion of Tortfeasor's Policy

For UIM claims, North Dakota law and standard policy terms require exhaustion of the tortfeasor's available liability coverage before UIM benefits are triggered. Our client has [settled with / obtained judgment against] the tortfeasor's carrier, [________________________________], for its policy limits of $[________________________________], as evidenced by [the attached release / the attached judgment].

E. Modified Comparative Fault — 50% Bar

Under N.D. Cent. Code § 32-03.2-02, North Dakota follows modified comparative fault with a 50% bar: a claimant whose fault equals or exceeds 50% recovers nothing. Our client bears zero comparative fault for this collision for the reasons set forth below.

F. Statute of Limitations

Claims under the UM/UIM policy are subject to a 6-year statute of limitations for contract claims under North Dakota law. The underlying tort claim is subject to a 6-year limitations period as well. See N.D. Cent. Code § 28-01-16. This demand is timely.

III. POLICY INFORMATION AND COVERAGE ANALYSIS

A. Policy Details

B. Coverage Trigger — [Select Applicable]

For Uninsured Motorist (UM) Claims — the tortfeasor qualifies as "uninsured" under North Dakota law because:

☐ The tortfeasor carried no liability insurance at the time of the collision
☐ The tortfeasor's insurer has disclaimed or denied coverage
☐ The tortfeasor's insurer is insolvent
☐ The tortfeasor was a hit-and-run driver who cannot be identified (physical contact confirmed per policy terms)
☐ The tortfeasor's liability limits are below North Dakota's $25,000/$50,000 statutory minimum

For Underinsured Motorist (UIM) Claims — the tortfeasor qualifies as "underinsured" because:

☐ The tortfeasor's liability limits of $[____]/$[____] are insufficient to compensate our client's damages
☐ The tortfeasor's policy has been or will be exhausted through payment of its limits
☐ Our client's damages substantially exceed all available liability coverage

IV. THE COLLISION — LIABILITY ANALYSIS

A. Facts of the Collision

On [__/__/____], at approximately [____] [a.m./p.m.], our client [________________________________] was [________________________________] at or near [________________________________] in [________________________________] County, North Dakota.

[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]

B. Tortfeasor's Negligence Under North Dakota Law

The tortfeasor, [________________________________], was negligent under North Dakota law in the following particulars:

☐ Failure to maintain a proper lookout in violation of N.D. Cent. Code § 39-10-[____]
☐ Failure to yield right-of-way in violation of N.D. Cent. Code § 39-10-[____]
☐ Following too closely in violation of N.D. Cent. Code § 39-10-[____]
☐ Excessive speed or speed unsafe for conditions in violation of N.D. Cent. Code § 39-09-01
☐ Distracted driving (cell phone / other device) in violation of N.D. Cent. Code § 39-08-23
☐ Operating a motor vehicle while impaired in violation of N.D. Cent. Code § 39-08-01
☐ Running a red light or stop sign
☐ Improper lane change
☐ [________________________________]

C. Evidence Supporting Liability

1. Law Enforcement Report
[________________________________] Police Department / [________________________________] County Sheriff Crash Report No. [________________________________], dated [__/__/____], which [cites the tortfeasor for / documents the tortfeasor's fault by] [________________________________].

2. Eyewitness Statements
[____] independent eyewitnesses observed the collision and confirm the tortfeasor's fault. Names and contact information are available upon request.

3. Physical and Photographic Evidence
Point-of-impact analysis, skid marks, vehicle damage patterns, and debris field location corroborate our client's account.

4. Accident Reconstruction
[If applicable:] [________________________________], a licensed accident reconstructionist, has concluded that [________________________________].

D. Absence of Comparative Fault

Under North Dakota's modified comparative fault standard (N.D. Cent. Code § 32-03.2-02), our client bears no fault for this collision. [Describe affirmative facts establishing client's lawful conduct.] Even if any fault were attributed to our client — which is denied — it would be far below the 50% bar.

V. NO-FAULT / PIP STATUS

A. PIP Benefits Received

Our client received the following North Dakota no-fault benefits under the Auto Accident Reparations Act (N.D. Cent. Code Chapter 26.1-41):

B. PIP Exhaustion / Subrogation

☐ PIP benefits have been fully exhausted
☐ PIP benefits have not been exhausted; the PIP insurer has been notified of this claim
☐ The PIP carrier asserts a subrogation lien of $[________________________________]

VI. INJURIES, TREATMENT, AND PROGNOSIS

A. Injury Summary

As a direct and proximate result of this collision, our client sustained the following injuries confirmed by medical documentation:

• [________________________________]
• [________________________________]
• [________________________________]

B. Treatment Chronology

C. Current Condition and Prognosis

[________________________________]
[________________________________]

D. Permanent Impairment Rating

VII. DAMAGES

A. Medical Expenses (Past)

B. Future Medical Expenses (Present Value)

C. Lost Income and Earning Capacity

Past Lost Income:
Our client was unable to work from [__/__/____] to [__/__/____] ([____] weeks). Pre-accident gross income was $[____]/week. Note: The ND no-fault work-loss benefit of $150/week has been credited.

Future Lost Earning Capacity (Present Value): $[____]

D. Non-Economic Damages — Pain, Suffering, and Loss of Enjoyment of Life

Under North Dakota law, non-economic damages are recoverable in tort for injuries meeting the threshold. See N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-41-08; see also N.D. Cent. Code § 32-03.2-04 (damages for non-economic loss). North Dakota does not impose a statutory cap on non-economic damages in motor vehicle tort actions.

[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]

E. Wrongful Death Damages (If Applicable)

Under N.D. Cent. Code § 32-21-01 et seq., the wrongful death beneficiaries are entitled to:

☐ Pecuniary loss of the decedent's contributions
☐ Loss of companionship and society
☐ Funeral and burial expenses: $[____]
☐ Pre-death medical expenses: $[____]

F. Total Damages Summary

VIII. DEMAND CALCULATION — UIM BENEFITS

We hereby demand payment of the full UIM per-person policy limit of $[________________________________]. Our client's net damages after the tortfeasor's payment and PIP credit remain $[________________________________], which substantially exceeds the available UIM limit. This is a clear policy-limits case.

IX. CONSENT TO SETTLE / PRESERVATION OF SUBROGATION

Pursuant to the terms of the UM/UIM policy and North Dakota law, we hereby formally request written consent to settle with the tortfeasor's carrier, [________________________________], for its policy limits of $[________________________________].

☐ Consent is requested within [____] calendar days of receipt of this letter.
☐ Failure to respond will be treated as consent under applicable policy terms and North Dakota law.
☐ We will hold the UIM carrier harmless and protect its subrogation rights as required.

If [________________________________] intends to pursue a subrogation claim directly against the tortfeasor, please advise in writing within the consent period.

X. BAD FAITH WARNING — NORTH DAKOTA LAW

North Dakota recognizes a common law cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in the insurance context. Corwin Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. v. Westchester Fire Ins. Co., 279 N.W.2d 638, 641 (N.D. 1979); Seifert v. Farmers Union Mut. Ins. Co., 497 N.W.2d 694 (N.D. 1993). An insurer owes its own insured a duty to handle claims fairly, promptly, and reasonably.

Prohibited conduct under N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-04-03(9) includes:

☐ Knowingly misrepresenting pertinent facts or policy provisions
☐ Failing to acknowledge communications with reasonable promptness
☐ Failing to adopt and implement reasonable claim investigation standards
☐ Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair, and equitable settlement when liability is reasonably clear
☐ Compelling the insured to litigate by offering substantially less than the amount ultimately recovered

Punitive damages are available under N.D. Cent. Code § 32-03.2-11 upon proof by clear and convincing evidence of oppression, fraud, or actual malice. Exemplary damages may not exceed two times compensatory damages or $250,000, whichever is greater. Post-judgment interest accrues at the prime rate plus 3 percentage points (currently 10.00% for 2026 per N.D. Supreme Court order). Pre-judgment interest accrues at 6% per annum under N.D. Cent. Code § 47-14-05.

Any unreasonable delay, lowball offer, or improper denial of this UM/UIM claim will result in a bad faith action in addition to the underlying contract claim.

XI. ARBITRATION

A. Policy Arbitration Clause

The policy [contains / does not contain] a binding arbitration clause for UM/UIM disputes.

☐ If the policy contains an arbitration clause: This letter serves as notice of our client's election to arbitrate pursuant to the policy and North Dakota law. We are prepared to select a mutually agreeable arbitrator. Please identify your party's arbitrator within [____] days.

☐ If no arbitration clause: Upon rejection or non-response to this demand, we will file suit in the [____] County District Court, State of North Dakota.

XII. RESPONSE DEADLINE AND CONSEQUENCES

This demand expires at 5:00 p.m. Central Daylight Time on [__/__/____].

Failure to accept this demand will result in:

1. Initiation of arbitration (if required under the policy) or filing of suit in North Dakota District Court for [____] County
2. Claims for bad faith damages under North Dakota common law and N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-04-03(9)
3. Claims for punitive/exemplary damages under N.D. Cent. Code § 32-03.2-11 upon clear and convincing evidence of oppressive or fraudulent conduct
4. Prejudgment interest at 6% per annum under N.D. Cent. Code § 47-14-05
5. A formal complaint filed with the North Dakota Insurance Department (NDID), 600 E. Boulevard Avenue, Dept. 401, Bismarck, ND 58505-0320; (701) 328-2440
6. Referral to the NDID for investigation of whether [________________________________]'s conduct constitutes a pattern of unfair claims practices under N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-04-03

XIII. CONCLUSION

Our client purchased UM/UIM coverage as required by North Dakota law for exactly this circumstance: to be protected when a negligent driver lacks sufficient insurance. [________________________________]'s own insured has sustained serious injuries, exhausted PIP benefits, and secured the tortfeasor's policy. The only remaining source of fair compensation is the UM/UIM coverage our client paid premiums to secure.

We urge [________________________________] to carefully review the evidence enclosed and tender its policy limits promptly.

Respectfully submitted,

[________________________________]

By: ___________________________
[________________________________]
N.D. State Bar No. [____]
[________________________________]
[City], ND [Zip]
[________________________________] (Tel.)
[________________________________] (Email)

Counsel for [________________________________]

ENCLOSURES:

☐ Policy declarations page and UM/UIM endorsements
☐ Tortfeasor's policy confirmation / coverage letter
☐ Proof of tortfeasor policy exhaustion (release or judgment)
☐ Law enforcement crash report (Report No. [________________________________])
☐ Medical records and bills — all providers
☐ PIP payment summary / PIP insurer statement of benefits paid
☐ Work loss documentation (pay stubs, employer letter, tax records)
☐ Photographs of vehicles and scene
☐ Impairment rating report from [________________________________]
☐ Life care plan / future damages report (if applicable)
☐ Accident reconstruction report (if applicable)

CC:

• [________________________________] (Client)
• [________________________________], Tortfeasor's Carrier (re: consent to settle)

NORTH DAKOTA UM/UIM — QUICK REFERENCE

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-40-15.2 (Uninsured Motorist Coverage): https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/north-dakota/nd-code/north_dakota_code_26-1_40_15-2
• N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-40-15.4 (Other Insurance and Priority of Payment): https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/north-dakota/nd-code/north_dakota_code_26-1_40_15-4
• N.D. Cent. Code Chapter 26.1-41 (Auto Accident Reparations Act): https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t26-1c41.pdf
• N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-04-03 (Unfair Claims Settlement Practices): https://codes.findlaw.com/nd/title-26-1-insurance/nd-cent-code-sect-26-1-04-03/
• N.D. Cent. Code § 32-03.2-02 (Comparative Fault): https://codes.findlaw.com/nd/title-32-judicial-remedies/nd-cent-code-sect-32-03-2-02/
• N.D. Cent. Code § 32-03.2-11 (Exemplary Damages): https://codes.findlaw.com/nd/title-32-judicial-remedies/nd-cent-code-sect-32-03-2-11/
• Corwin Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. v. Westchester Fire Ins. Co., 279 N.W.2d 638 (N.D. 1979)
• Seifert v. Farmers Union Mut. Ins. Co., 497 N.W.2d 694 (N.D. 1993): https://law.justia.com/cases/north-dakota/supreme-court/1993/920109-3.html
• North Dakota Insurance Department (NDID): https://www.insurance.nd.gov/consumers/insurance/auto
• Nolo — North Dakota No-Fault Car Insurance Rules: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/north-dakota-no-fault-car-insurance.html
• Nolo — North Dakota Car Accident Statute of Limitations: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/north-dakota-car-accident-laws.html
• ND Courts — Interest Rate on Judgments for 2026: https://www.ndcourts.gov/news/north-dakota/north-dakota-supreme-court/general-news/interest-rate-set-for-2026-judgments