Evaluating Overcharges: Should Your Company Pursue Claims Against Brokers and Carriers’

October 20, 2004

  • October 20, 2004 at 10:45 am
    Susan says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Matt – I agree. This guy is trying to get litigation business for his firm.

  • October 21, 2004 at 1:02 am
    Chad says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This is taken verbatim from Mr. Wood’s company website. Why not just posy his picture and business card?

  • October 20, 2004 at 5:15 am
    Chris says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This isn’t a news article; its a blatant attempt to incite litigation.

  • October 20, 2004 at 6:15 am
    Matt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This “article” is a primer on how to jump the litigation bandwagon. It’s completely premature and irresponsible. I can’t believe that this publication would dignify it with publication. “Hey! Just because you weren’t affected… no reason not to start suing someone right now! Clock is ticking!” Complete rubbish.

  • October 21, 2004 at 2:19 am
    Chris says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    First you published this in Claims Guides, now in Insurance Journal.

    This isn’t news. This is advertising.

  • October 21, 2004 at 2:21 am
    Earl Paige says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This article should have been labeled for what it is ” an advertisement for business” and an opportunity for a factual response should have been provided.
    Anyone in the insurance industry who can say, with a straight face, that they hadn’t been made aware of PSAs should be fired for not paying attention.
    They always had a taint to them and, in my opinion, should not have been used, however, they were widely known and written about over the last decade.
    The bid rigging is a wholly seperate issue, but the PSA uproar is noting but grandstanding.

  • October 21, 2004 at 6:41 am
    Milo says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I wonder when the New York Ag or any other AG will stand up and fight for the public related to the way Lawyers charge? 200 hours of work in one week? Hopefully thats coming next.

  • October 22, 2004 at 2:52 am
    Jackie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I hope the IJ had the sense to charge for the ad space on a per letter fee basis.

  • October 22, 2004 at 3:22 am
    John says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    remember, if there were no ambulance chasers we wouldn’t need a liability policy. They keep the underwriters and agents employed!!!

  • October 25, 2004 at 1:13 am
    Anthony says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The assertion that corporate clients should not take a look at potential wrongdoing by their brokers is rather incredulous, particularly in light of the recent AG action. It should not be forgotten that at least two AIG execs (and there will likely be more) have entered GUILTY pleas for involvement in a rather blatant criminal scheme. There is absolutely nothing wrong with an attorney seeking clients who have legitimate cases. I doubt any broker will be calling their clients to say “we’ve reviewed your file and found numerous breaches of our fiduciary duty which have resulted in considerable overcharges…here’s a refund”. Anyone who clamors the article is tantamount to ambulance chasing is probably guilty of similar misconduct, or is simply naive to the reality that misconduct is standard practice for some and has a significant financial impact on the industry as a whole (Marsh’s alleged $800 million profit?). The industry needs transparency towards its clients- a client has an absolute right to question the actions of its broker and demand proof that they have acted with the highest level of integrity.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*