If Dickie has a Deep Throat and can produce those documents in court, then
it\’s g\’bye State Farm.
Our home was in the middle of Katrina\’s destructive path. Other than lost refrigerated and frozen foods, we realized no damage because no trees down. USAA adjuster found lots of little things to pay us for. Even 1/2 of a generator we bought and never got to use. And some ruined stuff inside that the lovebugs did.
USAA is the way to go for those who qualify. It is a policyholder-owned company. No agents. No billboards hawking their wares. All settlements beyond just fair. Once we had a toilet backup that ruined a small part of wall-to-wall carpet. The phone desk person asked some questions and then said have the carpet
store fax them the bill. And that was it.
If the company makes a profit in a calendar year, the policyholder can expect a check in the mail for their share. Of course an adequate reserve is kept on hand to pay claims.
USAA was originally for military officers but recently added for the top 3 EM grades.
The article leads by talking about the man\’s jet, his suit and soul food. That has nothing to do with the gist of the issue of wind driven water coverage issues. Insurers support this Journal and I guess they can get anything printed even if its not journalism.
Dickie Scruggs is an arrogant bast###. To have the cahones to say that how dare an insurance company deny a claim to a US Senator, like he is supposed to be above the contract law? I don\’t think so. I hope he gets slammmed down hard on these cases.
While is do not agree w/ Dickie Scruggs and his lawsuits against the insurance industry, the article did bring to light that fact that he is a person w/ friends, family, community, etc. People in the insurance industry seem to forget there are real people on the other side of the dispute. While I hope Scruggs is not successful in his battle against insurers on the wind driven water issue, my hope is not based on dislike of him as a person or because of his profession. It is based on long standing contract law and interpretation of the flood exclusion in insurance policies. It would be the right decision for the right reason.
Jo is right and wouldn\’t that be refreshing to have something like that happen because it makes sense and is common sense! Maybe there is hope for our country yet if that happens.
I\’m sure they won\’t be laughing, and certainly they will be able to self-insure their exposures. As I stated earlier, I hope Dickie loses so that there will be insurance for those that need it the most.
Does anyone else find it strange that Trent Lott, who has always been in favor of limiting damages brought by plaintiffs and in putting caps on punitives is now being represented by his brother-in-law, one of those \”liberal greedy\” lawyers? I guess the shoe is on the other foot when you are the one who has suffered loss. Do we see some insincerity or double standard here?
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.
If Dickie has a Deep Throat and can produce those documents in court, then
it\’s g\’bye State Farm.
Our home was in the middle of Katrina\’s destructive path. Other than lost refrigerated and frozen foods, we realized no damage because no trees down. USAA adjuster found lots of little things to pay us for. Even 1/2 of a generator we bought and never got to use. And some ruined stuff inside that the lovebugs did.
USAA is the way to go for those who qualify. It is a policyholder-owned company. No agents. No billboards hawking their wares. All settlements beyond just fair. Once we had a toilet backup that ruined a small part of wall-to-wall carpet. The phone desk person asked some questions and then said have the carpet
store fax them the bill. And that was it.
If the company makes a profit in a calendar year, the policyholder can expect a check in the mail for their share. Of course an adequate reserve is kept on hand to pay claims.
USAA was originally for military officers but recently added for the top 3 EM grades.
The article leads by talking about the man\’s jet, his suit and soul food. That has nothing to do with the gist of the issue of wind driven water coverage issues. Insurers support this Journal and I guess they can get anything printed even if its not journalism.
Why would an insurance company pay to have this article printed?
Dickie Scruggs is an arrogant bast###. To have the cahones to say that how dare an insurance company deny a claim to a US Senator, like he is supposed to be above the contract law? I don\’t think so. I hope he gets slammmed down hard on these cases.
While is do not agree w/ Dickie Scruggs and his lawsuits against the insurance industry, the article did bring to light that fact that he is a person w/ friends, family, community, etc. People in the insurance industry seem to forget there are real people on the other side of the dispute. While I hope Scruggs is not successful in his battle against insurers on the wind driven water issue, my hope is not based on dislike of him as a person or because of his profession. It is based on long standing contract law and interpretation of the flood exclusion in insurance policies. It would be the right decision for the right reason.
Jo is right and wouldn\’t that be refreshing to have something like that happen because it makes sense and is common sense! Maybe there is hope for our country yet if that happens.
I wonder if Dickie and Trent will be grinning when all the insurance comanies leave Mississippi?
I\’m sure they won\’t be laughing, and certainly they will be able to self-insure their exposures. As I stated earlier, I hope Dickie loses so that there will be insurance for those that need it the most.
Does anyone else find it strange that Trent Lott, who has always been in favor of limiting damages brought by plaintiffs and in putting caps on punitives is now being represented by his brother-in-law, one of those \”liberal greedy\” lawyers? I guess the shoe is on the other foot when you are the one who has suffered loss. Do we see some insincerity or double standard here?
Insincerity on the part of politicians? Surely you jest! I think it is part of their job description.