\’State Farm representatives have contended that the company simply wanted to clarify to whom any money would be owed so duplicate payments could be avoided.\’
I read the whole article. Geting a SBA loan has nothing to do with State Farms obligation to pay claims. Or reason for a dismissal of law suit. You must be a State Farm Agent …..\”Who\’s sorry now!\” Remember those commercials….. Ha Ha
Poor Mark … feelings of Inadequacy causes him to say things mean to others to make him feel better. Just make sure you don\’t say the wrong thing to some one face to face or you will find yourself in the hospital. ha ha
I only skimmed the article but it did seem like an odd argument to me. Pretty creative though, huh? Attorneys definitely have some interesting arguments.
Hey Gill-
Aren\’t you surprised fakeadjustjoe didn\’t find his way here yet? Did he post at all yesterday? Uh oh- maybe he got arrested for panhandling!
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: RE: Ratings For the bad boys
Posted On: May 9, 2007, 6:19 pm CDT
Posted By: Melanie
Comment:
Michael Kunzelman
Associated Press
Smiley N. PoolThe dallas morning news
State Farm threatened to fire an engineering firm if it didn\’t have its reports blame water for damage, e-mails say.
NEW ORLEANS — Attorneys for homeowners suing State Farm Insurance Cos. after Hurricane Katrina long have accused the insurer of pressuring engineers to alter reports on storm-damaged homes so that policyholders\’ claims could be denied.
Now, some of the lawyers say they have evidence: internal e-mails from an engineering firm that helped State Farm adjust claims after the Aug. 29, 2005, hurricane destroyed thousands of homes on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.
State Farm denies pressuring engineers to change their conclusions, but the e-mails, obtained Tuesday, indicate the company was threatening to dismiss Raleigh, N.C.-based Forensic Analysis & Engineering Corp. less than two months after Katrina.
State Farm and other insurers say their homeowner policies cover damage from wind but not high water, including wind-driven storm surge.
Zach Scruggs, an attorney who is part of a legal team that sued State Farm on behalf of hundreds of homeowners, said Forensic turned over the e-mails as part of the pretrial discovery process for one of the lawsuits.
The e-mails \”confirm everything that we have always suspected,\” Scruggs said. \”What it says is pretty shocking. This outlines the whole scheme of theirs.\”
The e-mails exchanged between Forensic President and CEO Robert Kochan and Randy Down, the firm\’s vice president of engineering services, outline complaints against their firm\’s work from Alexis King, a State Farm manager in Mississippi.
Kochan, in an e-mail dated Oct. 17, 2005, says the firm will continue working with State Farm, but he talks about needing to \”redo the wording\” of a report after a discussion with King \”such that the conclusions are better supported.\”
The e-mail also says King didn\’t want local engineers to inspect properties because they were \”too emotionally involved\” and were \”working very hard to find justifications to call it wind damage when the facts only show water-induced damage.\”
In a reply dated Oct. 18, 2005, Down questioned the insurer\’s motivations. He suggested that on another occasion, State Farm asked the firm to remove information from a report because \”they would then have to settle.\”
\”I really question the ethics of someone who wants to fire us simply because our conclusions don\’t match hers,\” Down wrote.
Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, in Washington after testifying yesterday before the Senate Commerce Committee, said he knew about the e-mails for months as part of his criminal grand-jury investigation.
\”It is a document that clearly shows State Farm used engineers and coerced engineers to write a report like they wanted,\” Hood said.
Down, who has left Forensic, said that the threat to fire the company came \”out of the blue.\”
\”The question was why,\” Down added. \”The initial internal discussion I heard is that they didn\’t like our reports.\”
State Farm spokesman Phil Supple rejected the notion that the company pressured engineers to alter their conclusions.
\”Our employees are committed to conducting themselves in an ethical and appropriate manner,\” he said.
Not exactly sure what the point of your post is Reality.
I do know, however, that there is information from the original article that has been edited out of this one. This occurred in several newspapers.
When you leave a post, it is generally nice to also leave a comment as well. I assume you think this is proof of wrongdoing. All I see is a newspaper article (missing information) that doesn\’t prove anything at all.
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.
Poor State Farm. Instead of braging about how big they are and spending tons on advertising this fact they should focus on paying legitimate claims!
\’State Farm representatives have contended that the company simply wanted to clarify to whom any money would be owed so duplicate payments could be avoided.\’
This is just a stalling tactic by State Farm. Learn to digest the information.
I read the whole article. Geting a SBA loan has nothing to do with State Farms obligation to pay claims. Or reason for a dismissal of law suit. You must be a State Farm Agent …..\”Who\’s sorry now!\” Remember those commercials….. Ha Ha
Jake,
You must be an idiot. HA HA
Poor Mark … feelings of Inadequacy causes him to say things mean to others to make him feel better. Just make sure you don\’t say the wrong thing to some one face to face or you will find yourself in the hospital. ha ha
I don\’t think threats are allowed on this board.
I only skimmed the article but it did seem like an odd argument to me. Pretty creative though, huh? Attorneys definitely have some interesting arguments.
Hey Gill-
Aren\’t you surprised fakeadjustjoe didn\’t find his way here yet? Did he post at all yesterday? Uh oh- maybe he got arrested for panhandling!
Thank God for people like Jewel. A refreshing voice in the insurance wilderness
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: RE: Ratings For the bad boys
Posted On: May 9, 2007, 6:19 pm CDT
Posted By: Melanie
Comment:
Michael Kunzelman
Associated Press
Smiley N. PoolThe dallas morning news
State Farm threatened to fire an engineering firm if it didn\’t have its reports blame water for damage, e-mails say.
NEW ORLEANS — Attorneys for homeowners suing State Farm Insurance Cos. after Hurricane Katrina long have accused the insurer of pressuring engineers to alter reports on storm-damaged homes so that policyholders\’ claims could be denied.
Now, some of the lawyers say they have evidence: internal e-mails from an engineering firm that helped State Farm adjust claims after the Aug. 29, 2005, hurricane destroyed thousands of homes on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.
State Farm denies pressuring engineers to change their conclusions, but the e-mails, obtained Tuesday, indicate the company was threatening to dismiss Raleigh, N.C.-based Forensic Analysis & Engineering Corp. less than two months after Katrina.
State Farm and other insurers say their homeowner policies cover damage from wind but not high water, including wind-driven storm surge.
Zach Scruggs, an attorney who is part of a legal team that sued State Farm on behalf of hundreds of homeowners, said Forensic turned over the e-mails as part of the pretrial discovery process for one of the lawsuits.
The e-mails \”confirm everything that we have always suspected,\” Scruggs said. \”What it says is pretty shocking. This outlines the whole scheme of theirs.\”
The e-mails exchanged between Forensic President and CEO Robert Kochan and Randy Down, the firm\’s vice president of engineering services, outline complaints against their firm\’s work from Alexis King, a State Farm manager in Mississippi.
Kochan, in an e-mail dated Oct. 17, 2005, says the firm will continue working with State Farm, but he talks about needing to \”redo the wording\” of a report after a discussion with King \”such that the conclusions are better supported.\”
The e-mail also says King didn\’t want local engineers to inspect properties because they were \”too emotionally involved\” and were \”working very hard to find justifications to call it wind damage when the facts only show water-induced damage.\”
In a reply dated Oct. 18, 2005, Down questioned the insurer\’s motivations. He suggested that on another occasion, State Farm asked the firm to remove information from a report because \”they would then have to settle.\”
\”I really question the ethics of someone who wants to fire us simply because our conclusions don\’t match hers,\” Down wrote.
Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, in Washington after testifying yesterday before the Senate Commerce Committee, said he knew about the e-mails for months as part of his criminal grand-jury investigation.
\”It is a document that clearly shows State Farm used engineers and coerced engineers to write a report like they wanted,\” Hood said.
Down, who has left Forensic, said that the threat to fire the company came \”out of the blue.\”
\”The question was why,\” Down added. \”The initial internal discussion I heard is that they didn\’t like our reports.\”
State Farm spokesman Phil Supple rejected the notion that the company pressured engineers to alter their conclusions.
\”Our employees are committed to conducting themselves in an ethical and appropriate manner,\” he said.
Not exactly sure what the point of your post is Reality.
I do know, however, that there is information from the original article that has been edited out of this one. This occurred in several newspapers.
When you leave a post, it is generally nice to also leave a comment as well. I assume you think this is proof of wrongdoing. All I see is a newspaper article (missing information) that doesn\’t prove anything at all.
Thanks though