b'Mayumi BowersVintage Mortgage, Inc.A Wyatt Standard for Insurance Brokers?n November of 1966, Joseph and Clarice Wyatt walked into the Stockton office of Union Home Mortgage to borrow $2,500.They had no idea that the loan(s) they would get, and the ultimate litigation, would be referenced in numerous lawsuits against brokers, well into the next century.Union, as a broker, failed to draw WyattsBasically, Murray sued the insurance broker attention to specific, unfavorable clausesfor failing to make the insurance policy in the loan, allegedly breaching theirunderstandable.(Can insurance brokers fiduciary duty.They were found, amongreally do that?)The policy he purchased other allegations, to have engaged in adidnt even cover the ultimate loss against conspiracy against the borrower.The casewhich he sought to be insured.is often referenced in litigation, to indicate a brokers duty to look out for the interestsThe decision considered that the broker, of the borrower. (UPS) held themselves out as specializing in the type of insurance purchased by Murray. Punitive damages were awarded against the broker$200,000.That was a lot ofIn lawsuits against mortgage brokers, Wyatt money in 1979, the year the broker lostv. Union Home Mortgage is cited in at least their appeal. one out of three cases.Its interesting to see Murry v. UPS as the Wyatt of insurance In the world of insurance brokerage, a newbrokerage.More important to us, it may decision, Murray v. UPS Capital Management,help expand our understanding of the seems to impose a Wyatt-like duty on insurance brokers.continued on page 8 Spring 2021 Page 7'