Missouri Claims Compliance

Key regulatory requirements, correspondence deadlines, and mandated forms for Missouri (MO).

Quick Reference

Key Deadlines

Acknowledgment
10 business/working days
Accept/Deny
15 business/working days
Investigation
30 calendar days
Payment
PROMPTLY
Status Updates
45 calendar days

Requirements

  • Mandated Forms
  • Catastrophe Rules
  • Separate P&C / Life & Health
  • Fraud Warning
  • Depreciation Notice
  • E-Delivery (no specific statutory or regulatory requirement found)

Regulatory Authority

Missouri Department of Commerce and Insurance (DCI)

Phone: 800-726-7390 or 573-751-4126; Website: insurance.mo.gov or dci.mo.gov; Address: P.O. Box 690, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0690

Bad Faith: Mo. Rev. Stat. § 375.420

Key Statutes

  • Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 375.1000 to 375.1018
  • Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 20 §§ 100-1.010 to 100-1.100
Last reviewed: April 1, 2026

Missouri handles claims correspondence according to specific state regulations. Requirements vary depending on the line of business and specific claim circumstances.

Acknowledgment

Every claim must be acknowledged within 10 business days of receipt. The acknowledgment should identify the insurance policy and coverage at issue.

Denial

A written denial must be issued within 15 business days. The denial must reference the specific policy provisions, conditions, or exclusions relied upon.

Statutory Language

No specific statutory language mandated beyond standard disclosures.

LOB-Specific Requirements

Regulatory requirements for Missouri, grouped by line of business. Select a chip to filter.

SOL Notice In Denial Required
Yes
Unfair Claims Practices Act RefStatutory
Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 375.1000 to 375.1018
Prompt Payment Statute RefStatutory
No specific statutory or regulatory requirement found for a separate prompt payment act; prompt settlement standards are codified within the Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act and Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 20 § 100-1.050
HO Specific RequirementsStatutory
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 379.140 (Company not to deny value); Mo. Rev. Stat. § 379.150 (Partial loss by fire)
Public Adjuster RegulationsStatutory
No insurance company shall make payment of any insurance claim to a public adjuster unless the name of the insured is added as a joint payee on any claim check or draft; the payment must be sent to the address designated by the insured (Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 20 § 100-1.100(1))
Depreciation Notice RequiredStatutory
All adjustments based on betterment or depreciation must be documented in the claim file, itemized, explained, and must be fair and reasonable (Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 20 § 100-8.040)
Proof Of Loss RequirementsStatutory
No insurer shall deny any claim based upon the insured's failure to submit a written notice of loss within a specified time following any loss, unless this failure operates to prejudice the rights of the insurer (Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 20 § 100-1.020(1)(D))
Suit Limitation PeriodStatutory
Standard statutory limitations apply regardless of policy wording; all parts of any contract or agreement which either directly or indirectly limit the time in which any suit or action may be instituted shall be null and void (Mo. Rev. Stat. § 431.030)

Missouri Case Law

Published decisions that shape claim-handling and correspondence practice in Missouri. Pair these with the statutory deadlines above.

StatutoryCase LawReg. Bulletin
  • Case Law
    Bad FaithCommercial Property

    American College of Coverage Counsel. Qureshi v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co.

  • Case Law
    Reservation of RightsWorkers' Comp

    . Available at: https://law.justia.com/cases/missouri/supreme-court/1989/71290-0.html

  • Case Law
    Bad FaithCommercial Property

    Justia. Laster v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 693 S.W.2d 195 (1985).

  • Case Law
    Bad FaithCommercial Property
  • Case Law
    Bad FaithCommercial Property

    Roach Law. Missouri Law on Bad-Faith Insurance.

  • Reservation of RightsCommercial PropertyWorkers' Comp

    and reaffirmed in State ex rel. Rimco, Inc. v. Dowd (1993), Missouri views a defense under an ROR as an inherent conflict of interest, because the insurer may have an incentive to develop facts establishing non-coverage rather than defeating the insured's liability .

Show 7 more cases
  • Zumwalt v. Utilities Ins. Co

    228 S.W.2d 750 (1950)

    Case Law
    Bad FaithCommercial Property

    KC Attys. Missouri Bad Faith Insurance Law.

  • Reservation of RightsAuto

    . Available at: https://www.bakersterchi.com/a-review-of-allen-v-bryers

  • Closing LettersAuto

    if an insurer fails to fully apprise the insured of the specific reasons for denying a claim in a written denial letter, the insurer is estopped from asserting those unwritten defenses in subsequent litigation, provided the insured can demonstrate prejudice resulting from the lack of notice .

  • Bad FaithGeneral LiabilityProfessional Liability

    held that this statutory cap was unconstitutional as applied to common law torts that existed at the time the state constitution was adopted (1820), because it violated the right to a trial by jury . However, the caps remain fully enforceable for statutory causes of action .

  • Closing LettersCommercial Auto

    the Missouri Court of Appeals evaluated a vexatious refusal claim . In its defense, GEICO relied heavily on its claim file documentation, demonstrating that it communicated with the insured's attorney and properly documented its closure. The court record explicitly noted the insurer's internal file documentation: "closing letter b/c filing with a/c emailed to [Claimant]" .

  • Case Law
    Status UpdatesCommercial Auto

    . In Shobe, the Missouri Court of Appeals established that bad faith may be proven by direct or circumstantial evidence, heavily emphasizing an insurer's communication failures. The court explicitly listed the following communication-based failures as evidence of bad faith:

  • Reservation of RightsCommercial Property

    Missouri views a defense under an ROR as an inherent conflict of interest, because the insurer may have an incentive to develop facts establishing non-coverage rather than defeating the insured's liability .

Historical court cases are for reference only and may be superseded, distinguished, or abrogated.

Applicable Letter Templates

No letter templates currently found for this jurisdiction.