Mr. White woke up one morning to find that the interior of his car had been consumed in a fire, rendering the vehicle a total write off. He promptly made a claim under his car insurance policy. Soon after that, the insurance company accused White of starting his own car on fire and refused to pay out the claim. When White asked the insurance company to explain on what basis it was alleging arson, the company refused to provide an answer. Since that first refusal, the local fire chief has said there was no evidence of arson but still the insurance company refuses to pay. White believes that the insurance company is in breach of contract on several fronts including failing to pay out on the policy and failing to answer his questions regarding refusal of his claim when he first posed them. Assuming this analysis is correct, do you think White will be successful in claiming punitive damages?