AGA and Isaly have responded to the insurance company’s motion to compel their discovery responses. The company and its owner are seeking additional time from the court to respond to “the written discovery,” and are hoping the court to finds they did not waive their objections to Allstate’s written discovery. AGA filed the request today.
AGA and Isaly have requested the deadline of May 30, 2019 to respond to Allstate’s written discovery.
The lawsuit was filed by Allstate in late December 2018, and highlighted ten counts against AGA and Isaly claiming that they “tried to pressure Allstate’s insureds into hiring them for windshield replacements, obtaining assignments of benefits (AOBs) from insureds, submitting invoices to Allstate for excessive and unreasonable amounts and filing over 1,400 lawsuits for recovery of excessive and unreasonable amounts.”
Months after the complaint was filed, AGA and Isaly requested the case be dismissed.
“… in their motion to dismiss [they] are asking this court to ignore [Allstate’s] allegations as well. Defendants’ characterization of the complaint as “a cornucopia of hyperbole and legal conclusions that float freely on a sea of bombast” is not only overly dramatic, but flat wrong,” a portion of the filed response reads.
The insurance company then filed a response which detailed how it classifies itself, and defines itself as a “consumer” of auto glass services. This is important because Allstate claimed AGA and Isaly violated Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA). Allstate later explained how insurers can in fact pursue claims for damages under FDUTPA. According to court documents, Allstate stated previous Florida federal court cases have allowed insurers to pursue claims and damages under FDUTPA without it being questioned.
Currently AGA and Isaly are awaiting the court’s ruling on its request for a new deadline of May 30, 2019 to respond to Allstate’s written discovery. Look to future editions for more updates on this case.