That\’s insane.. yea, Travelers is kicking themselves in the A, right now, but how can even more insane is the verdict. Yea it punishes the company, but ultimately it punishes the consumers that have to pay the high cost of W.C. premiums…
I believe we\’d be better off without a WC \”system\”. Look at Texas: comp is not mandatory….. and business is booming. Let the courts deal with any issues that arise.
Jeeze! And remember peoples… the jury is still out on the \’punitive\’ part, which is usually much more considerable than the damage award. Maybe we should all move to Iowa (NOT!)
You have to wonder what the
\”existing psychological problems\” were that they referred to….sounds to me like the jury had few as well! I live in Iowa and would have hoped the judge would have stepped in with some common sense and lowered that amount! And they haven\’t even calculated punitive damages yet!! I wonder if the computer tech class code sees an increase in rates…must be a lot more dangerous than we thought!
The article didn\’t mention the specifics, so we don\’t know what the bad faith was. I don\’t know the details, but I\’m guessing it must have been pretty bad to get such a large award even before punitive.
Well, I looked it up and here is what Travelers had to pay…
1. 649.16 June 2 1999, during the period of his disability (permanent and total disability).
2. Pay accrued weekly benefits in a lump sum.
3. Interest on unpaid weekly benefits.
4. All the claiman\’ts medical expenses incurred after June 1, 1999. From the decision it looks like this guy was refered to several doctor, and had to have surgery. In addition, there were mental issues that the insured had to see a psychotherapist.
5. All costs of the matter (the suit) and any filing fees (so, lawyer fees too).
Doesn\’t seem like 10MM to me, but who knows what the total med costs were, and what the attoney fees were.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
That\’s insane.. yea, Travelers is kicking themselves in the A, right now, but how can even more insane is the verdict. Yea it punishes the company, but ultimately it punishes the consumers that have to pay the high cost of W.C. premiums…
I believe we\’d be better off without a WC \”system\”. Look at Texas: comp is not mandatory….. and business is booming. Let the courts deal with any issues that arise.
I can\’t believe a jury would award this guy $10,000,000! I\’ll bet he\’s on the golf course as we speak.
Jeeze! And remember peoples… the jury is still out on the \’punitive\’ part, which is usually much more considerable than the damage award. Maybe we should all move to Iowa (NOT!)
I bet they\’re wishing they had paid this claim now. Sounds like working in bad faith is not the best idea for insurance companies.
You have to wonder what the
\”existing psychological problems\” were that they referred to….sounds to me like the jury had few as well! I live in Iowa and would have hoped the judge would have stepped in with some common sense and lowered that amount! And they haven\’t even calculated punitive damages yet!! I wonder if the computer tech class code sees an increase in rates…must be a lot more dangerous than we thought!
Gee, I hope he doesn\’t hurt his back bending over to pick up his dropped/blowing score card!
ok, let\’s say Traveler\’s was \’wrong\’; simply losing in court over a denial that was based upon reasonable grounds is not bad faith.
Either allot more (or less) happened on the part of Travellers, or this jury really overstepped their reach; if so, there will be a guaranteed appeal.
The article didn\’t mention the specifics, so we don\’t know what the bad faith was. I don\’t know the details, but I\’m guessing it must have been pretty bad to get such a large award even before punitive.
Well, I looked it up and here is what Travelers had to pay…
1. 649.16 June 2 1999, during the period of his disability (permanent and total disability).
2. Pay accrued weekly benefits in a lump sum.
3. Interest on unpaid weekly benefits.
4. All the claiman\’ts medical expenses incurred after June 1, 1999. From the decision it looks like this guy was refered to several doctor, and had to have surgery. In addition, there were mental issues that the insured had to see a psychotherapist.
5. All costs of the matter (the suit) and any filing fees (so, lawyer fees too).
Doesn\’t seem like 10MM to me, but who knows what the total med costs were, and what the attoney fees were.