In Thomas v. Hartford Mut. Ins. Co., 2003 WL 220511 (Del. Super. Jan. 31, 2003) the Superior Court granted summary judgment on the consumer fraud claim because the fraud alleged was perpetrated by an agent after the sale of the insurance policy and the facts demonstrated the fraud was not "in connection with the sale or advertisement of the policy, and therefore does not fall within the constructs of the Consumer Fraud Act."