A good ambulance chaser knows it behoves him to be the first out of the gate.
I finally understand the genesis of the the joke “what do you call a lawyer at the bottom of the ocean–a good start”.
Last week on the Farmers agents ufaa.com site, an agent lamented that Farmers had authorized only $1000 in additional living expense payouts, when State Farm was paying out $2500. Now, Farmers is named in a lawsuit which hopes to prevent their poor claims service from ripping off flood victims. This is a company which is routinely sued by it’s own employees for unlawful practices in California. Once proud, Farmers is falling fast in national standing, from third place in 2002, to it’s current ranking of eighth place. This company is out to screw it’s policyholders.
The suit doesn’t allege anything specific about Farmers claims practices. It names every conceivable insurer in a pre-emptive strike to keep all of them from asserting policy language to deny, fully or partially, claims due to flooding.
Note that the LA Insurance Commissioner is named. Do you think that he is somehow in cahoots with Farmers? That he has improperly gone out and denied some claims?
Just because SF can afford to lose $2500 per claim on potentially uncovered losses doesn’t mean that Farmers has to follow suit. Theer are some carriers not paying even $1000 on a “no coverage, who cares” basis.
As far as being sued in CA, the dispute was whether adjusters are considered “exempt” employees, and thus not entitled to overtime pay. Almost every carrier classifies their adjusters as “exempt”. Many carriers, however, only have a 35 hour work week, and OT starts at 40 hrs.
It sounds like that chip on your shoulder came out of your ear.
I would not be suprosed if all insurers will try to deny these claims. In ANY CASE FOLKS if the insurers pay these claims the costs will be passes on to us. If the Gov’t pays for the losses we will pay for it in any case tax paying law following good citizens of the entire US will be paying for this one.
And for the record ANY one who builds a home below the level of the sea is just asking for trouble we all knew it would happen sooner or latter, Nature will have its way period and so shall the Farmers to try.
Some so called “Acts of God” (windstorm, tornado, lightning) are covered by HO policies, some “Acts of God” are not covered (flood, overflow of a body of water).
The standard flood exclusion in HO policies is not contingent on being an “Act of God” and it reads something like this:
We do not insure for loss caused directly or indirectly by any of the following:*******
c. WATER DAMAGE, meaning:
(1) Flood, surface water, waves, tidal water, overflow of a body of water, or spray from any of these, whether or not driven by wind;
My analogy, to find coverage would be to compare Lake P with a swimming pool located on the roof of a four star hotel. Severe winds come along and and blow down one or more sides of the pool and the water inundates the hotel.
That would be a windstorm loss, not a flood loss, baby.
The Complaint also speaks of ‘neglect’, but the Plaintiffs have not sued the Corps of Engineers or any govermental entities responsible for maintenance and/or repair of the levees. They will never prove that the carriers are negligent in failing to protect the citizens from the lake.
In reading your article the complaint says “that water did not come over the levy but flooded the areas in question only after the breeches occurred” Using the word Flooded says it all!
The attorneys are going at it all wrong…and, the insurers are weakly defended by their contractural “outs” via “Acts of God”….. Hurricanes and other natural disasters are acts of NATURE, and NOT God! God only created the means by which disasters occur, He does NOT “CAUSE” them….If I were a plaintiff litigator, I’d use bring in some theological authorities to show the contractual weakness and moral corruptness of the insurers, along with their “deceptive trade practices” from CECO to boardroom to underwriter to agent.
Don’t try to discuss a topic you know nothing about. Have you ever read a policy? Are you capable of understanding it if you came across one? And where does it say Act of God not covered? Please go offer your services to Jim Hood immediately; he may let you carry his coffee cup.
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.
Most Attorneys do not understand insurance or insurance contracts. They are just looking to make some cash. Or is that help the people…. right.
Do the math
600,000 residents
425 dead
10000 adjusters
&
1 million greedy lawyers going for:
GOLD OVER MOLD
MUD OVER FLOOD
INSANE OVER HURRICANE
Which side is contract law on?
A good ambulance chaser knows it behoves him to be the first out of the gate.
I finally understand the genesis of the the joke “what do you call a lawyer at the bottom of the ocean–a good start”.
Last week on the Farmers agents ufaa.com site, an agent lamented that Farmers had authorized only $1000 in additional living expense payouts, when State Farm was paying out $2500. Now, Farmers is named in a lawsuit which hopes to prevent their poor claims service from ripping off flood victims. This is a company which is routinely sued by it’s own employees for unlawful practices in California. Once proud, Farmers is falling fast in national standing, from third place in 2002, to it’s current ranking of eighth place. This company is out to screw it’s policyholders.
You nimrod!
The suit doesn’t allege anything specific about Farmers claims practices. It names every conceivable insurer in a pre-emptive strike to keep all of them from asserting policy language to deny, fully or partially, claims due to flooding.
Note that the LA Insurance Commissioner is named. Do you think that he is somehow in cahoots with Farmers? That he has improperly gone out and denied some claims?
Just because SF can afford to lose $2500 per claim on potentially uncovered losses doesn’t mean that Farmers has to follow suit. Theer are some carriers not paying even $1000 on a “no coverage, who cares” basis.
As far as being sued in CA, the dispute was whether adjusters are considered “exempt” employees, and thus not entitled to overtime pay. Almost every carrier classifies their adjusters as “exempt”. Many carriers, however, only have a 35 hour work week, and OT starts at 40 hrs.
It sounds like that chip on your shoulder came out of your ear.
I would not be suprosed if all insurers will try to deny these claims. In ANY CASE FOLKS if the insurers pay these claims the costs will be passes on to us. If the Gov’t pays for the losses we will pay for it in any case tax paying law following good citizens of the entire US will be paying for this one.
And for the record ANY one who builds a home below the level of the sea is just asking for trouble we all knew it would happen sooner or latter, Nature will have its way period and so shall the Farmers to try.
Some so called “Acts of God” (windstorm, tornado, lightning) are covered by HO policies, some “Acts of God” are not covered (flood, overflow of a body of water).
The standard flood exclusion in HO policies is not contingent on being an “Act of God” and it reads something like this:
We do not insure for loss caused directly or indirectly by any of the following:*******
c. WATER DAMAGE, meaning:
(1) Flood, surface water, waves, tidal water, overflow of a body of water, or spray from any of these, whether or not driven by wind;
My analogy, to find coverage would be to compare Lake P with a swimming pool located on the roof of a four star hotel. Severe winds come along and and blow down one or more sides of the pool and the water inundates the hotel.
That would be a windstorm loss, not a flood loss, baby.
The Complaint also speaks of ‘neglect’, but the Plaintiffs have not sued the Corps of Engineers or any govermental entities responsible for maintenance and/or repair of the levees. They will never prove that the carriers are negligent in failing to protect the citizens from the lake.
In reading your article the complaint says “that water did not come over the levy but flooded the areas in question only after the breeches occurred” Using the word Flooded says it all!
The attorneys are going at it all wrong…and, the insurers are weakly defended by their contractural “outs” via “Acts of God”….. Hurricanes and other natural disasters are acts of NATURE, and NOT God! God only created the means by which disasters occur, He does NOT “CAUSE” them….If I were a plaintiff litigator, I’d use bring in some theological authorities to show the contractual weakness and moral corruptness of the insurers, along with their “deceptive trade practices” from CECO to boardroom to underwriter to agent.
Don’t try to discuss a topic you know nothing about. Have you ever read a policy? Are you capable of understanding it if you came across one? And where does it say Act of God not covered? Please go offer your services to Jim Hood immediately; he may let you carry his coffee cup.