Donnie:
Of course you care deeply about your clients, as you should. But caring as deeply as you do about your clients has left little room for debate. In your mind, SF is one hundred percent wrong and you are one hundred percent right. Your hatred has clouded your judgement to such an extent that you have become irrational. We see this in Rosie’s rantings and I see it in you and you are suppose to be among the most intelligent of people. Attorneys used to be one of the most admired professions in this country but the hate that spews from their mouths when they try to argue their point is disheartening. Seventy percent of our legislators are attorneys-that is scary!!!
You trying to explain that to me is laughable. These contracts are ridiculously one sided, as one sised as a paper tiger insurance commissioner will allow. The commissioner is appointed by the governor who received big sums from the ins lobby to help fund his campaign (also that of the guy he/she beat in the primary and general election). Does anyone remember SF\’s big announcement that they were pulling auto coverage out of NJ? They needed to do that to get the governor back in line. Anyone in the know laughed and knew SF wasn\’t going anywhere. Get a clue how policies are written and regulated.
What have I said that is irrational? What happened to debating the facts? He is a lawyer, so lets attack him, not what he is saying. Forget who I am, what I do, where I come from, etc.
Did SF try to alter the claims process in these Katrina claims? Focus on that and not what I do for a living.
Of course they are one sided, that\’s the whole meaning/point of the contract of adhesion. There is no bargaining and no \”equal footing\” (between the \”insco.\” and the policy holder). So your point is that this is unfair. BFD! Life is unfair. If the policy holder, prospective or not, doesn\’t like the policy they can go without insurance, find another insurance carrier or start their own insurance company.
Donnie:
We cannot debate whether SF tried to alter anything because we do not have the facts. First law of debate-know your facts! I am not arguing the facts because I do not have enough facts to debate. The plaintiff attroneys obviously have the facts and they are so weak that they have to go to the press and argue their facts before an uniformed public that will, hopefully for the attorneys, rouse the public and cause them to become a lynchmob and attack the evil insurance monster. If I had the facts I would debate them. I do not and therefore will not. I see a lot of one sidedness in this debate and it is troubling.
I will try to post about everything I read in this one message:
\”Jewel….aren\’t you from FL? What part? May have a good looking guy for you. He is smart too!\” -Mary B.
Central Florida/Orlando area… smart is good… and a refreshing break from some of these imbeciles.
fakeadjusterjoe-
\”Give it up, the CEO Mr. Rust, put out a memo that employees were to defend the company to death. One of the agents posted it here.\”
Did I miss that post? Or is this something else you made up?
\”The agency and clerical (mostly clerical like Jewel, Mary B., David, and Mark) staff of State Farm are searching the internet for message boards to defend the mother company.\”
Well, now we see why we think Joe is such an idiot. He doesn\’t even have all the facts, yet Mary, David, Mark and I all work for SF. He probably think we work in the same office. ::yells to the crew:: \”Hey you guys! Let\’s go out for beers after work so we can talk about and laugh at Joe! No, Joe, it\’s okay, after you finish mopping you can come too. Sure, you can make fun of yourself. No problem!\”
Linda-
\”Hey Jewel if the bus crashes while you all are drinking and driving I just want everyone to know that is was Bushs fault\”
OK, now grab your sister Rosie so the bus can leave. ;) p.s. to not rosie- that post was too funny :)
waiting breathlessly-
Your response about lawyers knowing right from wrong was GREAT!!! I wait breathlessly (hopefully Donnie and Joe do too) for your next great posting. :)
Donnie-
\”What happened to debating the facts?\”
You brought up the alleged fact you\’re an attorney. Can we debate that? I think you\’re lying. You\’re not really an attorney. Did you think you would impress us? I know plenty of stupid lawyers though, so maybe you really are one. I really don\’t have all the facts though. Sorry, no jumping to conclusions on this one.
\”I don\’t know how apologists for the insurance industry (whether or not you consider yourself to be one) sleep at night. Wake up!\”
How can we sleep if you keep trying to wake us up? Shhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!
ACE-
If you\’re good looking, I will have your screening procedure commence at noon.
Thanks almost everyone! (Yes, I have too much free time on my hands today)
OK, seriously.. for all of you on here with a brain… this is where Joe and Donnie stop reading :)
Anyway, I was reading my local paper last night (Central Florida) and I came across this same article. However, I found one thing very interesting. The article is written by Michael Kunzelman… However, in MY newspaper this little, tiny piece of the article was missing.
\”Kochan, in an interview, said plaintiffs\’ attorneys are taking the e-mails out of context. King \”just felt like we weren\’t doing a technically accurate job,\’\’ but she wasn\’t pressuring Forensic to change conclusions so that claims could be denied, Kochan said.\”
Hmm… that changes the article quite a bit, doesn\’t it? This is why I don\’t always believe the media when they \”report the facts\”. What crap! This is also why I don\’t put much stock into what they say about big companies (and for the 1000th time I am not saying I am an INS CO supporter, Joe/Donnie… I know you asked someone to read this to you).
It\’s nice to know they left out a quote like that because they only had limited space. They should have just taken out all the verbs in the article and then we could have had a posting like we\’d get from Joe! :)
Please do not refer to me as Rosie\’s sister. I asked where you were from and might have a good looking smart guy for you. However, he is not in the same area as you and not interested in a move.
I guess I have too much time on my hands too but I just loved all the posts. Too bad Rosie did not join in.
I have been following the posts yesterday and this morning, mostly for entertainment value. I like to see opinions, debate and schoolyard bullying. However, in reading Donnie\’s latest post, I just have to jump in.
Donnie states… \”I know it is hard for many to say anything nice about lawyers, but the reputation is generally unwarranted.\”
Please substitute insurance carriers for the word lawyers. There are some carriers that deserve the bad rep they have just as there are many lawyers that deserve it. It is unfair to paint the entire insurance industry with the same brush. I work for an insurance company that pays the claims that are owed, and disputes the claims that are not owed. Do we get it wrong sometimes? Yes. Do we make mistakes sometimes? Yes. Are we human? Yes? How do I sleep at night? Very well thank you!
Donnie\’s next quote…\”A few bad apples get all the media attention.\” Isn\’t that what is going on with State Farm and Allstate right now?
I am not here to defend State Farm. If they are not paying claims they owe, and if they had engineers change reports and if they did all that has been alleged, they should be hung.
Another caveat…the article indicates the e-mails in dispute are open to different interpretation. How exactly were they meant? The interpretation will be up to a jury. Remember, perception IS reality.
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.
Donnie:
Of course you care deeply about your clients, as you should. But caring as deeply as you do about your clients has left little room for debate. In your mind, SF is one hundred percent wrong and you are one hundred percent right. Your hatred has clouded your judgement to such an extent that you have become irrational. We see this in Rosie’s rantings and I see it in you and you are suppose to be among the most intelligent of people. Attorneys used to be one of the most admired professions in this country but the hate that spews from their mouths when they try to argue their point is disheartening. Seventy percent of our legislators are attorneys-that is scary!!!
You trying to explain that to me is laughable. These contracts are ridiculously one sided, as one sised as a paper tiger insurance commissioner will allow. The commissioner is appointed by the governor who received big sums from the ins lobby to help fund his campaign (also that of the guy he/she beat in the primary and general election). Does anyone remember SF\’s big announcement that they were pulling auto coverage out of NJ? They needed to do that to get the governor back in line. Anyone in the know laughed and knew SF wasn\’t going anywhere. Get a clue how policies are written and regulated.
What have I said that is irrational? What happened to debating the facts? He is a lawyer, so lets attack him, not what he is saying. Forget who I am, what I do, where I come from, etc.
Did SF try to alter the claims process in these Katrina claims? Focus on that and not what I do for a living.
Of course they are one sided, that\’s the whole meaning/point of the contract of adhesion. There is no bargaining and no \”equal footing\” (between the \”insco.\” and the policy holder). So your point is that this is unfair. BFD! Life is unfair. If the policy holder, prospective or not, doesn\’t like the policy they can go without insurance, find another insurance carrier or start their own insurance company.
I do know how policies are written. By lawyers….
Donnie:
We cannot debate whether SF tried to alter anything because we do not have the facts. First law of debate-know your facts! I am not arguing the facts because I do not have enough facts to debate. The plaintiff attroneys obviously have the facts and they are so weak that they have to go to the press and argue their facts before an uniformed public that will, hopefully for the attorneys, rouse the public and cause them to become a lynchmob and attack the evil insurance monster. If I had the facts I would debate them. I do not and therefore will not. I see a lot of one sidedness in this debate and it is troubling.
I have just used all of the restraint in my inner fibre not to insult you. What is your opinion of how SF handled Katrina claims? Fraudulant?
So many posts since I left yesterday…
I will try to post about everything I read in this one message:
\”Jewel….aren\’t you from FL? What part? May have a good looking guy for you. He is smart too!\” -Mary B.
Central Florida/Orlando area… smart is good… and a refreshing break from some of these imbeciles.
fakeadjusterjoe-
\”Give it up, the CEO Mr. Rust, put out a memo that employees were to defend the company to death. One of the agents posted it here.\”
Did I miss that post? Or is this something else you made up?
\”The agency and clerical (mostly clerical like Jewel, Mary B., David, and Mark) staff of State Farm are searching the internet for message boards to defend the mother company.\”
Well, now we see why we think Joe is such an idiot. He doesn\’t even have all the facts, yet Mary, David, Mark and I all work for SF. He probably think we work in the same office. ::yells to the crew:: \”Hey you guys! Let\’s go out for beers after work so we can talk about and laugh at Joe! No, Joe, it\’s okay, after you finish mopping you can come too. Sure, you can make fun of yourself. No problem!\”
Linda-
\”Hey Jewel if the bus crashes while you all are drinking and driving I just want everyone to know that is was Bushs fault\”
OK, now grab your sister Rosie so the bus can leave. ;) p.s. to not rosie- that post was too funny :)
waiting breathlessly-
Your response about lawyers knowing right from wrong was GREAT!!! I wait breathlessly (hopefully Donnie and Joe do too) for your next great posting. :)
Donnie-
\”What happened to debating the facts?\”
You brought up the alleged fact you\’re an attorney. Can we debate that? I think you\’re lying. You\’re not really an attorney. Did you think you would impress us? I know plenty of stupid lawyers though, so maybe you really are one. I really don\’t have all the facts though. Sorry, no jumping to conclusions on this one.
\”I don\’t know how apologists for the insurance industry (whether or not you consider yourself to be one) sleep at night. Wake up!\”
How can we sleep if you keep trying to wake us up? Shhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!
ACE-
If you\’re good looking, I will have your screening procedure commence at noon.
Thanks almost everyone! (Yes, I have too much free time on my hands today)
OK, seriously.. for all of you on here with a brain… this is where Joe and Donnie stop reading :)
Anyway, I was reading my local paper last night (Central Florida) and I came across this same article. However, I found one thing very interesting. The article is written by Michael Kunzelman… However, in MY newspaper this little, tiny piece of the article was missing.
\”Kochan, in an interview, said plaintiffs\’ attorneys are taking the e-mails out of context. King \”just felt like we weren\’t doing a technically accurate job,\’\’ but she wasn\’t pressuring Forensic to change conclusions so that claims could be denied, Kochan said.\”
Hmm… that changes the article quite a bit, doesn\’t it? This is why I don\’t always believe the media when they \”report the facts\”. What crap! This is also why I don\’t put much stock into what they say about big companies (and for the 1000th time I am not saying I am an INS CO supporter, Joe/Donnie… I know you asked someone to read this to you).
It\’s nice to know they left out a quote like that because they only had limited space. They should have just taken out all the verbs in the article and then we could have had a posting like we\’d get from Joe! :)
Please do not refer to me as Rosie\’s sister. I asked where you were from and might have a good looking smart guy for you. However, he is not in the same area as you and not interested in a move.
I guess I have too much time on my hands too but I just loved all the posts. Too bad Rosie did not join in.
I have been following the posts yesterday and this morning, mostly for entertainment value. I like to see opinions, debate and schoolyard bullying. However, in reading Donnie\’s latest post, I just have to jump in.
Donnie states… \”I know it is hard for many to say anything nice about lawyers, but the reputation is generally unwarranted.\”
Please substitute insurance carriers for the word lawyers. There are some carriers that deserve the bad rep they have just as there are many lawyers that deserve it. It is unfair to paint the entire insurance industry with the same brush. I work for an insurance company that pays the claims that are owed, and disputes the claims that are not owed. Do we get it wrong sometimes? Yes. Do we make mistakes sometimes? Yes. Are we human? Yes? How do I sleep at night? Very well thank you!
Donnie\’s next quote…\”A few bad apples get all the media attention.\” Isn\’t that what is going on with State Farm and Allstate right now?
I am not here to defend State Farm. If they are not paying claims they owe, and if they had engineers change reports and if they did all that has been alleged, they should be hung.
Another caveat…the article indicates the e-mails in dispute are open to different interpretation. How exactly were they meant? The interpretation will be up to a jury. Remember, perception IS reality.
Everyone, have a great Friday!