How long your insurer has to respond

An insurer that stops replying is not usually refusing you. It is usually waiting, because waiting is free unless somebody starts counting.

Most states put statutory clocks on an auto claim: how long the insurer has to acknowledge it, how long to accept or reject it in writing, and how long to pay once an amount is agreed. Naming the right clock in a letter changes its tone from a complaint into a deadline.

The three clocks

State	Acknowledge	Accept or reject	Pay	Citation
Alabama	15 days	30 days	30 days	Ala. Admin. Code r. 482-1-125-.06(1), (3), (4); -.07(1), (2), (6); -.04(c)
Alaska	10 working days	15 working days	30 working days	3 AAC 26.040(a)(1)-(2); 3 AAC 26.070(a)(1)-(2)
Arizona	10 working days	15 working days	—	Ariz. Admin. Code R20-6-801(E)(1), (G)(1)(a)
Arkansas	—	—	10 working days	Ark. Ins. Rule 43 § 9(f)
California	15 days	40 days	30 days	10 CCR §§ 2695.5(b), 2695.5(e), 2695.7(b), 2695.7(c)(1), 2695.7(h), 2695.8(c), 2695.8(e)(4)(B)
Colorado	—	—	—	C.R.S. § 10-3-1104(1)(h)(II), (V), (VI)
Connecticut	—	—	—	Conn. Gen. Stat. § 38a-816(6)(B), (6)(N); § 38a-816(15)(B) (scope unconfirmed)
Delaware	15 working days	30 days	—	18 DE Admin. Code § 902-3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.5; 18 Del. C. § 2304(16)
Florida	—	30 days	20 days	Fla. Stat. § 626.9541(1)(i)3.b, 3.d; § 627.4265
Georgia	15 days	15 days	10 days	Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. R. 120-2-52-.03(1), (3), (4), (5)
Hawaii	15 working days	—	30 days	HRS § 431:13-103(a)(11)(B), (E), (F), (G)
Idaho	—	—	—	Idaho Code § 41-1329(2), (14)
Illinois	15 working days	—	30 days	50 Ill. Adm. Code 919.40; 919.50(a), (a)(1); 919.80(b)(2); 919.80(c)
Indiana	—	—	—	IC 27-4-1-4.5(2), (5); IC 27-4-1-5.6(c), (d)
Iowa	—	30 days	30 days	Iowa Admin. Code r. 191-15.41(2), (3), (6)
Kansas	—	—	—	K.A.R. 40-1-34 (notice-of-expiring-time-limit provision)
Kentucky	15 working days	30 days	30 days	806 KAR 12:095 §§ 5(1), 5(3), 6(1)(a), 6(1)(c), 6(1)(d); § 1(5)
Louisiana	—	—	30 days	La. R.S. 22:1892(A)(1), (A)(4), (B)(1)(a)
Maine	—	—	30 days	24-A M.R.S. § 2436(1), (3)
Maryland	—	10 business days	—	COMAR 31.15.12.03B, C, D; .05B; .06B
Massachusetts	—	—	—	M.G.L. c. 176D § 3(9)(b), (f), (n)
Michigan	—	—	60 days	MCL 500.2006(1), (3), (4); MCL 500.2026(1)(b), (e)
Minnesota	10 business days	30 business days	—	Minn. Stat. § 72A.201 subd. 4
Mississippi	—	—	—	Miss. Code § 83-11-551(4)
Missouri	—	15 working days	—	20 CSR 100-1.050(1)(A)
Montana	—	—	—	MCA § 33-18-201(2), (6)
Nebraska	15 days	15 days	15 days	210 Neb. Admin. Code ch. 60, § 006.01, § 006.03; § 008.01, § 008.02, § 008.04
Nevada	20 working days	30 days	30 days	NRS 690B.012(1), (2); NAC 686A.665(1); NAC 686A.675(1), (3)
New Hampshire	—	—	—	N.H. RSA 417:4, XV(2), XV(11)
New Jersey	10 working days	—	10 working days	N.J.A.C. 11:2-17.6(b); 11:2-17.7(f); 11:2-17.7(a), (c)1 (auto physical damage excluded)
New Mexico	—	—	—	NMSA § 59A-16-20(B), (D); § 59A-16-20(F) (catastrophic claims only)
New York	15 business days	15 business days	5 business days	11 NYCRR §§ 216.4(a)-(b), 216.6(c), 216.6(f), 216.7(b)(1), 216.7(c)(4), 216.7(c)(7), 216.7(d)(2)-(3); N.Y. Ins. Law § 2601(a)(4)
North Carolina	30 days	—	10 business days	N.C.G.S. § 58-3-100(c); 11 NCAC 04 .0419(c)(2); N.C.G.S. § 58-63-15(11)e; 11 NCAC 04 .0421(b)(1)
North Dakota	—	—	—	N.D.C.C. § 26.1-04-03(9)(b), (9)(j)
Ohio	15 days	21 days	10 days	Ohio Adm. Code 3901-1-54(F)(2)-(3), (G)(1), (G)(5)-(6), (C)(5)
Oklahoma	30 days	60 days	—	36 O.S. § 1250.6(A); § 1250.7(A), (C); § 1250.4(C); § 3629(B)
Oregon	30 days	—	—	OAR 836-080-0225(1), (2), (3), (4)
Pennsylvania	10 working days	15 working days	—	31 Pa. Code §§ 146.5(a), 146.6, 146.7(a)(1), (c)(1)
Rhode Island	15 days	21 days	30 days	230-RICR-20-40-2.6(A), 2.7(A)-(B), 2.7(F)
South Carolina	—	—	—	S.C. Code § 38-59-10; § 38-59-20(2)
South Dakota	30 days	—	—	SDCL 58-33-67(1); SDCL 58-12-34(7), (13)
Tennessee	—	60 days	30 days	Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0780-01-05-.08(1), (2), (3), (5), (6)
Texas	15 days	15 business days	5 business days	Tex. Ins. Code §§ 542.055, 542.056, 542.057, 542.058
Utah	15 days	30 days	30 days	Utah Admin. Code R590-190-6(1), R590-190-10(2)(a)-(c), R590-190-9(21)
Vermont	10 business days	15 business days	10 business days	Vt. Reg. I-79-2 § 5(A), 5(B); § 6(A), 6(C), 6(G)
Virginia	15 days	15 days	—	14 VAC 5-400-50(A), (C); 14 VAC 5-400-60(A), (B)
Washington	10 working days	15 working days	—	WAC 284-30-360(1); WAC 284-30-380(1), (3)
West Virginia	15 working days	10 working days	15 working days	W. Va. Code R. § 114-14-6.2.a, 6.2.b, 6.3, 6.7, 6.11, 6.12; § 114-14-7.3.g
Wisconsin	10 days	—	—	Wis. Admin. Code Ins 6.11(4); (3)(a)1; (3)(a)7
Wyoming	—	—	—	Wyo. Stat. § 26-13-124(a)(ii), (a)(v)

Two things in that table are easy to get wrong.

Business days are not calendar days. Some states count every clock in business days, some count in working days, and some mix all three within a single regulation — a calendar-day acknowledgement clock beside a business-day decision clock beside a shorter business-day payment clock. The table above carries the day type beside every period for exactly this reason. A deadline computed as calendar days when the rule says business days will arrive early, and telling an insurer their time is up when it is not is the fastest way to lose the thread of an otherwise good letter.

Two weeks of business days is nearly three weeks of calendar days. Over a claim with three clocks running, the difference between counting them right and counting them wrong is most of a month.

Some clocks have no fixed period. Several states require a decision within a "reasonable time" without ever saying what that is, and some set no pay-by date after acceptance at all. A blank in that table is a real finding about the state rather than a gap in our research, and it changes where your leverage comes from: with no number to point at, the argument moves to the explanation duty and to how long is defensible on these particular facts.

Where the clock starts

A period is only useful if you know what starts it. "Fifteen business days to accept or reject" usually runs from the insurer receiving a completed proof of loss and everything else it asked for, which is later than the date of the accident and often later than you think.

That distinction matters for the payment clock in particular. Several states count payment from the insurer accepting the claim, so until that happens there is no date to hold them to. ClaimMath's packet prints a period rather than a date for those, because printing a date from the report date would produce a deadline earlier than the acceptance it depends on.

What a missed deadline is actually worth

A passed deadline is rarely a payday, and it is worth being clear-eyed about that. What it usually buys is leverage: a dated, checkable fact you can put in a follow-up letter or a regulator complaint, in a dispute that is otherwise all opinion about value.

Missing a deadline is not automatically bad faith, and it is worth being careful with that phrase — it means something specific, it is hard to establish, and using it loosely in a letter invites a reply that argues about the word instead of the delay.

A few states go further and attach a financial consequence to lateness. The clearest of them turns a missed period into statutory interest, which is particularly significant where the state recognizes no common-law first-party bad-faith claim: the interest is then the principal remedy the statute offers, and it is worth naming precisely.

Where an interest or penalty provision exists, it is usually modest against the size of the settlement and it does not arrive automatically — someone has to raise it. But it changes the tenor of a follow-up, because it converts "you are late" into a specific consequence the insurer's own regulator can apply.

Where no such provision exists, the deadline is still worth tracking. An insurer that has missed a statutory response period has given you the one thing in this whole dispute that is hard to argue with — everything else is a contest about value, and this is a date. It belongs in the first line of a complaint.

How settled these rules are

Claim-handling deadlines are the best-established field in this ledger. Almost every published state has a rule that has been read at its source and quoted, which is unusual — most of the other fields on this site have far more states where the answer is an absence or a gap.

That density is not an accident. Most states adopted a version of the same model unfair claims settlement regulation, and the acknowledgement and decision clocks are the part almost all of them kept, often word for word. It is why these deadlines are quotable in a way that valuation standards are not: the same sentence appears in dozens of state codes, and your state's version is almost certainly in there somewhere.

The practical consequence is that this is the argument least likely to be met with "our state doesn't require that". It usually does, the wording is close to what the adjuster has seen before, and the date arithmetic is checkable by both sides in a minute.

The two states where the answer is not clean

Two states sit outside that pattern, and both are worth understanding if you are in one of them.

In one, the statute does set day counts, but they are framed around paper versus electronic claim submission in a way that is characteristic of health-claim prompt-payment provisions rather than auto ones. The figures are real and are on the state's row, but they are not encoded as auto deadlines here, because asserting them as such would be reading a health-claim rule onto a car. If you are arguing that clock, quote it as what it is and let the adjuster tell you whether they accept it applies.

In the other, the automobile regulation was read twice specifically for acknowledgement, decision and payment day counts and has none. A clock may exist elsewhere in the wider statute, which has not been read end to end. So the honest position is that the state's auto rule is silent, and any deadline argument there has to come from the policy or from the general duty to act promptly rather than from a number.

Using this

Write down the date on your valuation report and the date you last sent the insurer everything they asked for. Those two dates start most of the clocks above. Then, in the letter, say what you are asking for and by when — quoting the period, not just asserting a date — and put it on your calendar.

If the date passes with no written reply, that is the moment the complaint to your state regulator stops being a threat and becomes a fact. You are no longer asking a department to referee a disagreement about what a car was worth. You are reporting that a regulated company did not answer within the period the state set, which is a much easier thing for a regulator to act on and a much harder thing for an insurer to explain.

One practical note on record-keeping: send things in a way that produces a date you can prove. Email is fine. A portal message is fine if it timestamps and you screenshot it. A phone call is not, however clearly you remember it — and the clocks in the table above all start from something the insurer received, which means the burden of showing when they received it tends to land on you.