September 21, 2021


Today's News Headlines, Breaking News & Latest News from India and World, News from Politics, Sports, Business, Arts and Entertainment

VGO accuses insurers of failing to protect the landmark’s privacy case

2 min read

Two years after agreeing to pay 17 17 million to settle a landmark privacy lawsuit, TV producer VGO has returned to court, accusing two insurers of failing to defend the case.

On Thursday, VGO Navigator filed a lawsuit against the insurance company and Arch Insurance Co., both alleging wrongful denial of coverage. The lawsuit alleges that the navigators were particularly harsh, with a view to “disgusting” behavior that hindered the viewer’s ability to defend itself. The lawsuit seeks 10 million from Navigators alone.

VGO has faced dozens of lawsuits since the November 2015 report on the proposal, which revealed that the TV maker was selling data on consumer viewing habits. The firm finally agreed to a 2.2. Million settlement with the Federal Trade Commission in February 2017, under which it agreed not to track such national data without confirmation from customers.

VGO Class wanted to dismiss the action claims, which were consolidated in a case in Santa Ana, California. But Judge Josephine Staton twice rejected the offer, forcing Vigio to make an expensive settlement in October 2018.

The insurance lawsuit provides some behind-the-scenes details about what to do in that case. The lawsuit alleges that Chab, A.K. The Federal Insurance Co. paid millions to defend the case and to settle it under the umbrella policy with its commercial general liability and VGO.

VGEO also sought coverage from navigators, which issued a policy covering covering 8 million in liability for directors and officers. According to the lawsuit, however, navigators denied the coverage – first saying it could contribute to defense spending – citing policy boycotts for claiming “privacy invasions.”

VGO argued that the suits also mentioned other allegations beyond the invasion of privacy. VGO further claims that the refusal of navigators to sue violates the insurance industry’s standard that defense costs are borne if insurers can only show “possibility” for coverage.

Vigio’s attorneys tried to include navigators in the settlement talks in early 2018, but were repeatedly rejected.

The Arch Navigator also issues a policy beyond the limits of the policy. According to the lawsuit, Arch never responded to VG’s request for coverage.

The lawsuit alleges that the million 17 million settlement was quite good, exceeding the Navigator and Chaab policy limits. The lawsuit further states that Chub did not pay the full price for the protection of the suits, and that VGO and Chub disagreed on Chub’s obligation until a confidential settlement was reached in June 2018, stating that Chub’s potential legal claims against arches and navigators under the agreement were assigned to VG.

The lawsuit alleges that the navigators ‘behavior was “malicious” and “deliberately and consciously disregarded Vigio’s right to avail benefits under the navigators’ policy.”

Seeking punitive damages in addition to VGO’s actual losses and expenses.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *