Opinion ID: 2572615
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: loss and duty to defend

Text: Because there was no claim according to the policy and hence, no duty to defend, we need not address whether there was a loss as defined by the policy. Though TVT asserts that PIIC breached its duties of good faith and fair dealing in refusing to defend TVT, such breaches can only occur where there is a valid claim according to an insurance policy and the insurer refuses to abide by the policy. We have held: The insurer has a duty to provide coverage if conditions are met under the insurance contract.... However, [a] claim can only be brought on the basis that a duty under the contract has been breached. Questions like Was the claim fairly debatable? or Did the insurer unreasonably withhold benefit payments to the insured? are all premised on the notion of whether the insurer acted in bad faith given the evidence of a valid claim under the policy. Robinson v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 137 Idaho 173, 179, 45 P.3d 829, 835 (2002) (emphasis added). Because there was not a valid claim under the policy, PIIC did not breach its duty of good faith and fair dealing towards TVT.