What right does Max have regarding his insurance claim if the policy lacks a settlement clause?

If a policy lacks a settlement clause, Max's right to insist on payment of money is established under the principles of insurance law. A settlement clause typically outlines how a claim will be settled, including whether it will be compensated in cash or through other means such as repairs or replacements. In the absence of such a clause, the default expectation is that the insurer will settle the claim in the form of a monetary payment.

This aligns with the general understanding that insurance policies are designed to provide financial protection to policyholders. If a claim is valid and the insurance company is liable, the absence of specific terms about settlement methods means that the policyholder is entitled to receive the monetary value of the claim, as this is the essence of insurance - to indemnify the insured against loss.

The other options are not applicable in this situation because insisting on payment aligns with the fundamental nature of insurance contracts, while accepting only in-kind settlements would imply an agreement to a specific type of compensation, which is not stipulated in the absence of a settlement clause. Similarly, negotiating for a higher payout may or may not be valid depending on the circumstances surrounding the claim but does not directly relate to the lack of a settlement clause. Filing a complaint with a regulator is typically a step taken