Car insurance claims in South Dakota

South Dakota is an at-fault state with an unusually thin compulsory package. «Every driver or owner of a motor vehicle shall at all times maintain in force one of the forms of financial responsibility on the motor vehicle» — a liability policy meeting § 32-35-70, a bond, «a certificate of deposit of money or securities … in the amount of fifty thousand dollars», or a certificate of self-insurance — and «failure to maintain financial responsibility is a Class 2 misdemeanor» (§ 32-35-113). The policy limits the statute fixes, in words rather than figures, are twenty-five thousand dollars for bodily injury to or death of one person, fifty thousand for two or more subject to the one-person limit, and twenty-five thousand for injury to or destruction of the property of others in any one accident. NOTHING READ COMPELS A MOTORIST TO BUY FIRST-PARTY MEDICAL COVER, and that is why the fault system is «at-fault» rather than «add-on». What the law compels is an OFFER: «no application for an automobile liability policy may be taken … unless the supplemental coverages set forth in § 58-23-8 are made available to the named insured» (§ 58-23-7), and those have their own floors — «accidental death benefits of at least ten thousand dollars» where death occurs within ninety days, «indemnity of at least sixty dollars per week» for disability extending beyond fourteen days «for a period of at least fifty-two consecutive weeks», and indemnity «irrespective of legal liability, for medical expenses in an aggregate amount of at least two thousand dollars for each such injured person», incurred within two years of the accident. The $2,000 medical floor is the lowest first-party figure on any US row here and the $60 weekly indemnity has not been amended since 1971.

The shared-fault rule is South Dakota’s own and contains no percentage at all: contributory negligence «does not bar a recovery when the contributory negligence of the plaintiff was slight in comparison with the negligence of the defendant», and damages are then «reduced in proportion to the amount of plaintiff’s contributory negligence» (§ 20-9-2). A 1998 amendment added a second sentence that matters in practice — that comparison «shall be made without disclosing any determination of percentage of plaintiff’s fault by special interrogatory» — so the question a South Dakota jury answers is qualitative, and any figure you meet attached to the state has been imported from somewhere else. THE DATASET RECORDS THE RULE AS «unclear» RATHER THAN FORCING IT INTO A CAMP, and the statute is quoted in full beside the field. The limitation periods split the opposite way from most states: three years from accrual for «an action for personal injury», under a subdivision three words long (§ 15-2-14(3)), and six years for «an action for taking, detaining, or injuring any goods or chattels», which is where a damaged vehicle sits (§ 15-2-13(4)). Both sections open with the same proviso, «except where, in special cases, a different limitation is prescribed by statute». NO PERIOD IS PUBLISHED FOR A SUIT ON YOUR OWN POLICY OR A UM/UIM CLAIM: § 15-2-13(1)’s six years for «an action upon a contract, obligation, or liability, express or implied» were read and are the general contract period, but that a South Dakota court applies them to a motor policy rather than a special-case period inside title 58 has not yet been verified against a primary text and is not stated here.

Both halves of uninsured-motorist protection are compulsory here, which few states do. «No policy … may be delivered or issued for delivery in this state with respect to any motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in this state, except for snowmobiles, unless coverage is provided therein or supplemental thereto in limits for bodily injury or death equal to the coverage provided by such policy for bodily injury and death, for the protection of persons insured thereunder who are legally entitled to recover damages from owners or operators of uninsured motor vehicles AND hit-and-run motor vehicles» (§ 58-11-9); and «no motor vehicle liability policy of insurance may be issued or delivered in this state … unless underinsured motorist coverage is provided therein at a face amount equal to the bodily injury limits of the policy» (§ 58-11-9.4). NEITHER SECTION OFFERS THE NAMED INSURED ANY REJECTION ROUTE IN THE TEXT READ — unlike Hawaii, Alaska, Delaware or Arizona — which is why umUim is «mandatory» in the strong form. Both cap the MANDATE, not the purchase, at «one hundred thousand dollars because of bodily injury to or death of one person in any one accident and, subject to the limit for one person, three hundred thousand dollars … unless additional coverage is requested by the insured», and a policy insuring government-owned vehicles need not carry uninsured-motorist cover at all.

How the underinsured cover pays is the detail to understand before relying on it, and it is the thing a summary will get wrong. «Subject to the terms and conditions of such underinsured motorist coverage, the insurance company agrees to pay its own insured for uncompensated damages as its insured may recover on account of bodily injury or death arising out of an automobile accident BECAUSE THE JUDGMENT RECOVERED AGAINST THE OWNER OF THE OTHER VEHICLE EXCEEDS THE POLICY LIMITS THEREON. Coverage shall be limited to the underinsured motorist coverage limits on the vehicle of the party recovering LESS the amount paid by the liability insurer of the party recovered against» (§ 58-11-9.5). So South Dakota UIM is an excess-of-limits, judgment-based cover that pays the UIM limit MINUS what the liability insurer paid: a reader with 100/300 UIM facing a 25/50 driver whose insurer pays $25,000 has $75,000, not $100,000, and on the face of the section needs a judgment rather than a settlement. Two statutory safe harbours sit beside it and both are commonly argued the other way: «refusal of the issuer of the underinsured motorist coverage to waive its statutory right of subrogation does not constitute bad faith», and «a liability insurer may pay the limits of the liability policy it issued without obtaining a complete release on behalf of its insured. Such payment does not abrogate any continuing duty to defend and does not constitute bad faith» (§ 58-11-9.6).

On the claim itself the one hard deadline is thirty days, and in South Dakota it is STATUTORY rather than administrative: failing «to acknowledge and act within thirty days upon communications with respect to claims arising under insurance policies and to adopt and adhere to reasonable standards for the prompt investigation of such claims» is an unfair or deceptive act (§ 58-33-67(1)), the days plain and unqualified and so calendar days on the face of the statute. The rest of that section is promptness without numbers — including «failing to promptly provide a reasonable explanation of the basis in the insurance policy in relation to the facts or applicable law for denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise settlement» — and two of its subdivisions are worth checking against your own file: an insurer may not require «as a condition of payment of a claim that repairs to any damaged vehicle shall be made by a particular contractor or repair shop», and it must not fail «to make a good faith assignment of the degree of contributory negligence in ascertaining the issue of liability», a duty that pairs directly with the slight-negligence rule. NO AFFIRM-OR-DENY OR PAYMENT CLOCK IS PUBLISHED, AND THE REASON IS RECORDED RATHER THAN LEFT AS SILENCE: § 58-33-67 was read end to end and its only day count is the thirty days of subdivision (1); the Administrative Rules endpoint was exercised and works, but the one chapter probed, 20:06:13, is MEDICARE SUPPLEMENT INSURANCE, and no unfair-claims-settlement chapter was located because the publisher serves no rules table of contents. This row does NOT claim South Dakota has no such rule — only that none was found — and the fifteen-working-day and thirty-day figures of Nebraska, Arkansas and West Virginia are expressly not borrowed.

Because § 58-33-69 provides that «nothing in §§ 58-33-66 to 58-33-69, inclusive, grants a private right of action», the thirty days belong to the Division of Insurance to enforce. The policyholder’s own remedy is § 58-12-3: where «it appears from the evidence that such company or exchange has refused to pay the full amount of such loss, and that such refusal is vexatious or without reasonable cause», the Department of Labor and Regulation, the trial court and the appellate court «shall, if judgment or an award is rendered for plaintiff, allow the plaintiff a reasonable sum as an attorney’s fee to be recovered and collected as a part of the costs» — mandatory once judgment is for the plaintiff, subject to a TENDER DEFENCE where the insurer tendered before suit and was not beaten at trial, and expressly not exclusive, since «the allowance of attorney fees hereunder shall not be construed to bar any other remedy, whether in tort or contract». No interest rate and no day count appear in that section. After a crash the driver «shall immediately stop» and give the details and «render to any person injured in such accident reasonable assistance, including the carrying of such person to a physician or surgeon for medical treatment if it is apparent that such treatment is necessary or is requested by the injured person» — WITH NO DOLLAR THRESHOLD AT ALL, since «damage to property» is enough (§ 32-34-3); failing to stop where there is injury or death is a Class 6 felony under § 32-34-5, which also revokes the registration receipt. Reporting has a PAIR of dollar figures rather than one, and a draft that prints a single threshold is wrong whichever it picks: immediate notice «by the quickest means of communication … to the nearest available law enforcement officer who has jurisdiction» is owed on «bodily injuries or death to any person or property damage to an apparent extent of one thousand dollars or more to any one person’s property or two thousand dollars per accident», either limb sufficing, both figures dating from SL 2000, ch 162, § 1 on the face of the history line (§ 32-34-7). For a parked car, leave the information on the vehicle and notify police: where «the owner of the damaged vehicle is not at the scene of the accident, the driver shall immediately leave such information on the other motor vehicle» (§ 32-34-6), and the unattended-property section adds a duty to «without unnecessary delay notify the nearest office of a duly authorized police authority» (§ 32-34-4). Complaints go to the Division of Insurance inside the Department of Labor and Regulation — the same department § 58-12-3 names as a forum that awards fees — which says in its own words that «if you have a complaint, contact the entity involved first». Whether inherent diminished value is recoverable in South Dakota has not yet been verified against a primary text and is not stated here: the Judiciary’s own host offers no full-text opinion search, no South Dakota opinion was read, and no administrative rule was searched for the term either, so unlike Iowa, Nebraska and West Virginia this row claims NO regulatory negative on the point.