speaking of pathetic, please illuminate what insurance carrier profit has to do with this subject in any way?
are you suggesting a carrier cannot make profit if anyone is denied a claim? Jim, I understand there can be many degrees of disagreement as to what is compensable vs what is not, but I really don\’t follow you as to what profit has to do with any of this.
Please recall many carriers were losing money a few years back. Does that in any way justify them to deny any due benefit that is truly owed in that time period? No, a claim is a claim; if it is owed, pay same. If not, deny the hell out of it. Some years I make profit, some I don\’t, but either way, I\’m supposed to pay what I owe and deny the rest, right?
Or is this really an anti-Wal-mart post in disguise? Last time we checked, it was still considered ok to make a profit in this country. Profit does not make a person or company evil.
And please keep in mind the original subject: the claimant claims he is no longer the same man because he reached for some papers that blew away. Not exactly the work related injuries we picture when we think of how wc started.
WC costs are a big consideration when starting or maintaining a business. The more liberal the court approved settlements, the higher the premium, the harder it is on the business to cover that cost. And yes, that all must go into the cost that is passed to the customer.
Well Chad, I know it\’s a big leap for a guy like you, but let\’s give it a try. If there is so much fraud on the part of claimants, why is it that insurers can earn such record profit? If so many people have all these fraudulent claims, wouldn\’t you expect the bottom line to reflect that?
Ultimately, insurance premiums have very little to do with claims and everything to do with the stock market. Remember a few years ago when the ins companies were making annual profit of less than 10 billion a year? That was when the stock marlet crashed. No Chad, there is nothing wrong with making a profit. Unless, you make that profit off the injured backs of the least powerful in society: The uneducated Joe Blow construction worker.
Workcomp fraud = companies must be losing money, or at least not making much money.
Profits = little fraud, plus denials of valid bluecollar working class type wc claims.
Underwriting profit = carriers walking all over the little guy, ripping them off, denying their claims.
but if u/w profit exists, and the common folk aren\’t being represented, why don\’t they get attorneys, who will make them pay!! I know they do, because I see their ads on my t.v. and they say they make the big insurance companies pay, and I believe them, because they are attornies.
Seriously, if a deserving wc claim is denied, there are legal remedies. It\’s not 1984 yet, Jim. Just Jameslogic 2007.
James, their aint enough space to take you to task, and my time is way too valuable to waste on an intellect such as yours. Please continue to enjoy your ignorance. Distrust all who have money. Really distrust big companies; they wouldn\’t be big unless they walked over little guys.
I am not preaching to you. I did not put words in your mouth. Stop trying to insult me as if I can not read or comprehend. Are you an English teacher?
I write about what happens to an injured worker and all you can do is critique me. What can you do to make life easier for the injured worker??? How can you or anyone else in the insurance \”business\” make it where the injured worker can get the medical treatment that is needed? When will the doctors be allowed to do there jobs instead of the adjuster acting as the doctor? I don\’t believe any adjuster has a medical degree.
I\’ve figured you are set in your ways. You will be who you are and say what you think about others without really understand what is going on. So be it.
I\’ve tried many times to explain how the insurance companies are fraudulant against honest injured workers.
I\’m happy that you have agreed with me on some points. What they are you\’ve never said. I too agreed with you on something. I\’m not attacking you in anyway. Just trying to get answers which you don\’t have.
What I do believe is life is more precious then money. Sure wish the insurance company saw it that way. But they don\’t….. they have a bottom line (which is how to beat there already huge profit line) profit instead.
Until anyone in the insurance company is stuck in the WC system you will never know exactly how one is treated. Just to let you know….. dogs in a dog pound are treated better. Those in prison are treated better. What ashame it is that injured workers are nothing more to the insurance company then a debt and a number they don\’t want to see. Just keep collecting money for those who buy a policy and keep raising the rates.
I wonder how business would be for the insurance companies if it wasn\’t a LAW to have to have it! Makes you think doesn\’t it?
That sad part is….. the fact that an injured worker has to get an attorney to begin with. That in itself tells you that the insurance companies do a lot of wrong.
Very often the amount of the denied claim is small enough that a lawyer cannot take the case without losing money, even if they win. That makes it hard for many of these claimants to get lawyers. Thus, many deserving claims cannot not get representation.
I would appreciate if you wouldn\’t preach to me as if I don\’t agree with some of your points.
You have put words in my mouth on several occasions. That is when I ask you if you can read and/or comprehend. If I didn\’t \”say\” (post) something, please don\’t attack me for something I didn\’t even do.
You had a short blurb about your source in one of your many posts. \”The facts have been on the news programs. They have also been in the papers.\” Well, thank you for posting something a little more specific like 20/20 or Dateline. I know I wouldn\’t remember the exact dates either, so I am not arguing with you on that point. However, that is a whole lot more specific than you had been before.
I can read, I can comprehend and I check people\’s posts again before I respond to them. To me, \”in the papers and on the news programs\” is weak. If I had used that as my source, I feel you would have called me on it.
Anyway, I agree with some of your points. But, wouldn\’t it be nice if the world was fair?
OK, well you did (in the past) put words in my mouth.
I never said you didn\’t make any valid points. What I asked you for were sources for \”facts\” you posted here. But, obviously you are set in your ways as well.
I feel for the injured worker who gets jerked around. But, since you don\’t know as much about work comp from a historical perspective, let me help you out just a bit on that point. Before workers compensation, an employee would have to sue an employer for any type of recourse. They had to be able to afford to take an employer to court, prove the employer was negligent (and we all know sometimes work comp claims are true accidents and/or the \”stupidity\” (for lack of a better word) of the employee and/or his coworker) and then he would be entitled to reimbursement. As someone pointed out earlier, it\’s hard to find a lawyer to take a little case these days- imagine how it was in the 19th century.
Anyway, I am sure the system should be changed for the better. Lots of things (and people!) should be changed for the better. Good luck with that though!
As one of 11 jurors in this case I can assure you this case is a lot more involved than you think. The work comp commission aleady sided with Mr. Zimmer and awarded him and then when Travelers appealed that verdict they lost again in appellate court. This company had BAD FAITH the entire course of this case. I wish you all would read the case file and then judge us hicks in Iowa as idiots. Believe me, none of us took our role lightly!
Thank you for speaking up, both now, and through your verdict! No one on this web site or involved in this discussion knows anywhere as much about the facts of that case as you do. Yet, the grandstands are full of monday morning quarterbacks, aren\’t they?
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.
speaking of pathetic, please illuminate what insurance carrier profit has to do with this subject in any way?
are you suggesting a carrier cannot make profit if anyone is denied a claim? Jim, I understand there can be many degrees of disagreement as to what is compensable vs what is not, but I really don\’t follow you as to what profit has to do with any of this.
Please recall many carriers were losing money a few years back. Does that in any way justify them to deny any due benefit that is truly owed in that time period? No, a claim is a claim; if it is owed, pay same. If not, deny the hell out of it. Some years I make profit, some I don\’t, but either way, I\’m supposed to pay what I owe and deny the rest, right?
Or is this really an anti-Wal-mart post in disguise? Last time we checked, it was still considered ok to make a profit in this country. Profit does not make a person or company evil.
And please keep in mind the original subject: the claimant claims he is no longer the same man because he reached for some papers that blew away. Not exactly the work related injuries we picture when we think of how wc started.
WC costs are a big consideration when starting or maintaining a business. The more liberal the court approved settlements, the higher the premium, the harder it is on the business to cover that cost. And yes, that all must go into the cost that is passed to the customer.
Well Chad, I know it\’s a big leap for a guy like you, but let\’s give it a try. If there is so much fraud on the part of claimants, why is it that insurers can earn such record profit? If so many people have all these fraudulent claims, wouldn\’t you expect the bottom line to reflect that?
Ultimately, insurance premiums have very little to do with claims and everything to do with the stock market. Remember a few years ago when the ins companies were making annual profit of less than 10 billion a year? That was when the stock marlet crashed. No Chad, there is nothing wrong with making a profit. Unless, you make that profit off the injured backs of the least powerful in society: The uneducated Joe Blow construction worker.
Workcomp fraud = companies must be losing money, or at least not making much money.
Profits = little fraud, plus denials of valid bluecollar working class type wc claims.
Underwriting profit = carriers walking all over the little guy, ripping them off, denying their claims.
but if u/w profit exists, and the common folk aren\’t being represented, why don\’t they get attorneys, who will make them pay!! I know they do, because I see their ads on my t.v. and they say they make the big insurance companies pay, and I believe them, because they are attornies.
Seriously, if a deserving wc claim is denied, there are legal remedies. It\’s not 1984 yet, Jim. Just Jameslogic 2007.
James, their aint enough space to take you to task, and my time is way too valuable to waste on an intellect such as yours. Please continue to enjoy your ignorance. Distrust all who have money. Really distrust big companies; they wouldn\’t be big unless they walked over little guys.
I am not preaching to you. I did not put words in your mouth. Stop trying to insult me as if I can not read or comprehend. Are you an English teacher?
I write about what happens to an injured worker and all you can do is critique me. What can you do to make life easier for the injured worker??? How can you or anyone else in the insurance \”business\” make it where the injured worker can get the medical treatment that is needed? When will the doctors be allowed to do there jobs instead of the adjuster acting as the doctor? I don\’t believe any adjuster has a medical degree.
I\’ve figured you are set in your ways. You will be who you are and say what you think about others without really understand what is going on. So be it.
I\’ve tried many times to explain how the insurance companies are fraudulant against honest injured workers.
I\’m happy that you have agreed with me on some points. What they are you\’ve never said. I too agreed with you on something. I\’m not attacking you in anyway. Just trying to get answers which you don\’t have.
What I do believe is life is more precious then money. Sure wish the insurance company saw it that way. But they don\’t….. they have a bottom line (which is how to beat there already huge profit line) profit instead.
Until anyone in the insurance company is stuck in the WC system you will never know exactly how one is treated. Just to let you know….. dogs in a dog pound are treated better. Those in prison are treated better. What ashame it is that injured workers are nothing more to the insurance company then a debt and a number they don\’t want to see. Just keep collecting money for those who buy a policy and keep raising the rates.
I wonder how business would be for the insurance companies if it wasn\’t a LAW to have to have it! Makes you think doesn\’t it?
That sad part is….. the fact that an injured worker has to get an attorney to begin with. That in itself tells you that the insurance companies do a lot of wrong.
Very often the amount of the denied claim is small enough that a lawyer cannot take the case without losing money, even if they win. That makes it hard for many of these claimants to get lawyers. Thus, many deserving claims cannot not get representation.
I would appreciate if you wouldn\’t preach to me as if I don\’t agree with some of your points.
You have put words in my mouth on several occasions. That is when I ask you if you can read and/or comprehend. If I didn\’t \”say\” (post) something, please don\’t attack me for something I didn\’t even do.
You had a short blurb about your source in one of your many posts. \”The facts have been on the news programs. They have also been in the papers.\” Well, thank you for posting something a little more specific like 20/20 or Dateline. I know I wouldn\’t remember the exact dates either, so I am not arguing with you on that point. However, that is a whole lot more specific than you had been before.
I can read, I can comprehend and I check people\’s posts again before I respond to them. To me, \”in the papers and on the news programs\” is weak. If I had used that as my source, I feel you would have called me on it.
Anyway, I agree with some of your points. But, wouldn\’t it be nice if the world was fair?
The End
OK, well you did (in the past) put words in my mouth.
I never said you didn\’t make any valid points. What I asked you for were sources for \”facts\” you posted here. But, obviously you are set in your ways as well.
I feel for the injured worker who gets jerked around. But, since you don\’t know as much about work comp from a historical perspective, let me help you out just a bit on that point. Before workers compensation, an employee would have to sue an employer for any type of recourse. They had to be able to afford to take an employer to court, prove the employer was negligent (and we all know sometimes work comp claims are true accidents and/or the \”stupidity\” (for lack of a better word) of the employee and/or his coworker) and then he would be entitled to reimbursement. As someone pointed out earlier, it\’s hard to find a lawyer to take a little case these days- imagine how it was in the 19th century.
Anyway, I am sure the system should be changed for the better. Lots of things (and people!) should be changed for the better. Good luck with that though!
As one of 11 jurors in this case I can assure you this case is a lot more involved than you think. The work comp commission aleady sided with Mr. Zimmer and awarded him and then when Travelers appealed that verdict they lost again in appellate court. This company had BAD FAITH the entire course of this case. I wish you all would read the case file and then judge us hicks in Iowa as idiots. Believe me, none of us took our role lightly!
Thank you for speaking up, both now, and through your verdict! No one on this web site or involved in this discussion knows anywhere as much about the facts of that case as you do. Yet, the grandstands are full of monday morning quarterbacks, aren\’t they?