At issue is whether Allstate can single out Ochoa and his staff for special underwriting requirements; in this case, to go beyond the six-month requirement of proof of prior insurance before binding the policy – as Allstate requires all its agents to do. Allstate allegedly imposed a go-beyond requirement on Ochoa, who was Spanish, and allegedly accused him of falsifying the information beyond the six-month period. As usual, Allstate did not provide Ochoa the evidence supporting this accusation and thus gave him a chance to defend himself. Instead, they sent a letter to TN Department of Commerce and Insurance, announcing that Ochoa was terminated with cause due to “providing false information to the company” without the supporting documentation enclosed. Sadly, the Dept. did not ask for the supporting documents from Allstate and gave them to Ochoa for him to learn the evidence and gave him a chance to defend himself. It is quite lawful for a company in the private sector to deny due process; it is quite deplorable for a Dept. of the public sector to fail offering an accused the opportunity of due process to defend himself.
The Territory Sales Leader Eric Harvey was a co-defendant because he allegedly initiated a company contest for auto production and promised to award an iPad to the winner. Ochoa won but, instead of an iPad, was allegedly given a $25 BP gift card. Harvey allegedly placed roadblock on Ochoa’s sales of his agency to his former boss, an Allstate agent-owner, whom Ochoa had worked as a subagent before becoming independent, and who thus withdrew his offer to buy. Harvey allegedly refused to give Ochoa the routine business reports of lost ratio, retention, etc., which were essential for the sale of an agency.
The case was settled on 5/14/12, one year 2 months and 3 days after the filing of the complaint on 3/11/11. Relatively speedy for an agent v Allstate lawsuit.