In: Operations Management
Beek’s house was destroyed by fire and claims were filed with the insurance
company. The insurance company (insurer) hired James to investigate the fire as it
was suspicious about the cause. Subsequently, the insurer denied the claims based on
James’s report. Thompson sued the insurer and Cannon. Beek claimed to be a
third party beneficiary of the James-insurer contract. Is Beek correct? If so what
type of beneficiary is he and why?
Beek was not correct in his claim regarding the third party beneficiary for James-insurer contract. If we refer California Civil Code section 1559 then it clearly says that contracts which involves third party intended beneficiaries has to be made for the third party benefit. In this case James is just an agent for the insurance company who is acting as a third party investigator into the case of week. So James in this case is not representing him in any capacity instead of it he is not representing Beek only working for the insurers.