When we have liberal politicians that live in their youthful drug induced \”trips\” and become so called leaders it is a wonder any company, ANY COMPANY, would wish to remain in this state.
Higher taxes so the politicians can spend more on riduclous projects just to strut their political \”stuff\”, gay marriages, and the inability to figure out this horrible traffic problem. They need to hire someone like Disney Imagineers to come in and build a traffic infrastructure that would work (!) and not cost a zillion dollars.
Needless to say the trial lawyers should all be shipped off to some island.. else we will all be sued out of existence. They are the enemy to this society.
The problem (one of many) with this bill is that if, as reported, a mere violation of the administrative code, can support a bad faith claim, the what really is \”bad faith\” has been trivialized. The litmus test in many states for a defense against bad faith is that the issue was \”fairly debatable\” – in other words, the converse is that bad faith can only be found if there\’s no conceivable way a reasonble person could interpret the policy the way the insurer did. This law would result in any error, even a good faith mistake about the meaning or interpretation of a code section, supporting at least allegations of bad faith.
Who do you suppose ends up paying for this? The insurers? Not likely – even though some states bar use of bad faith settlement amounts in rate making, the fact is that most cases with bad faith allegations get settled – maybe for more than they are worth, but still, settled without specific allocation to bad faith.
As a result, there\’s upward pressure on severities, which feed right into the rate making process. In the end, EVERY insurance consumer pays more so a few people can bring bad faith cases, even where there is none.
Lawyers\’ Motto loud and clear: YOUR PAIN, OUR GREEDFUL GAIN.
Now let\’s see how the bar will redefine PAIN to guarantee their expected windfall begins at the lowest possible threshold.
Consider this: A high percentage of legislators are lawyers who will return to private practice after their government careers are done. The best way to ensure their post-legislative wealth is to use their power now to rig the rules in their favor. This is a disgraceful and very transparent conflict of interest. Legislatively speaking, the fox guards the henhouse in Washington.
That\’s why I maintain that no single \”party\” can or should be blamed for the state of things in this country.
We\’ve got lawyers on BOTH sides of the aisle. It is they who are making such a mess of things with their lies, dirty legislation and pocket-lining agendas; regardless of their political party affiliation.
I am totally amazed at the ignorance of some people, especially those that buy into the Insurance propoganda. Do you not read the papers!… Safeco CEO made over $17,000,000.00 in her first year!… that is why rates increase. Want to fix the problem??? Insurance companies should play fair instead of victimizing thier own insureds so that the CEO can make millions and millions, can\’t wait to see what she makes next year!
Every time someone wants to \”ship lawyers off to some island,\” I just cringe. People don\’t like lawyers because they are paid to take on difficult problems – like when an insurance company refuses to pay for a medical procedure, even though the doctor the insurer hired to evaluate it says its necessary.
I know a lot of lawyers, and the overwhelming majority of them just want their client to be treated fairly.
Fortunately bad faith is the exception and not the rule. But why should we shut out those who have truly been wronged because you don\’t like the fact that someone got a lawyer to help them? I know its easy to say, but if it were you that couldn\’t get an insurer to pay your legitimate claim wouldn\’t you want a lawyer\’s help?
I work on the legal end of the insurance industry and you\’re right, Steve. Some lawyers just want what is right and just for their clients.
But…
Having gone out for cocktails on numerous occasions with attorneys from work or attorneys from other firms; and after many candid conversations, I can tell you that most of the ones I know aren\’t in it for their health. In fact, a lot of them have very creative ways of \”billing time\” which inflates their profits significantly.
You\’re right in that it isn\’t fair for us to blindly stereotype all attorneys as greedy and money-hungry.
Unfortunately, I know too many who are crazy with greed and go beyond fighting for what is fair, instead fighting for every dime they can squeeze out of the opposing party. There comes a point where it is more about winning than it is about what is right.
I feel the same way about politicians. There are a few (precious few) who are really in it for the people. Sadly, I truly do believe the majority of them are crooks, both Republicans and Democrats equally.
The public is slowly catching on to trial bar efforts to hijack our courts. The trial bar is essentially asking for a hand out based not on the facts of their case but on intimidation. No one likes a bully, especially one afraid of a fair fight.
This thing is, it\’s not just lawyers and politicians. I\’ve worked with retailers and brokers for 10 years now, and have never met a single one that wasn\’t almost completely obsessed with money. I have watched as they lie about when they recieved bind requests, lied about losses, lied about losing emails and lied about knowing material facts that they know would disqualify a risk. It\’s very easy to sit back and slam lawyers for being unethical ambulance chasers, but the fact is that I\’ve met many of both, and by far, without any doubt, insurance sales professionals like retailers and brokers are generally much less scrupulous and much more dishonest than lawyers.
Lawyers go through long expensive schooling and yes, many are ultra competitive, and yes, there are those that come up with \”creative\” ways to bill, but that is certainly not the norm as everyone thinks. My brother is a lawyer, and I know many others that he works with and went to school with, and they would not risk being disbarred to bill a few extra hours. Lawyers can be disbarred for many things and believe me, it\’s on the front of all their minds before they do anything.
Same thing goes for agents who do not want to lose their licenses. I have had my license for 27 years and I would not lie, cheat or steal from any client. There are bad apples in every profession.
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.
When we have liberal politicians that live in their youthful drug induced \”trips\” and become so called leaders it is a wonder any company, ANY COMPANY, would wish to remain in this state.
Higher taxes so the politicians can spend more on riduclous projects just to strut their political \”stuff\”, gay marriages, and the inability to figure out this horrible traffic problem. They need to hire someone like Disney Imagineers to come in and build a traffic infrastructure that would work (!) and not cost a zillion dollars.
Needless to say the trial lawyers should all be shipped off to some island.. else we will all be sued out of existence. They are the enemy to this society.
The problem (one of many) with this bill is that if, as reported, a mere violation of the administrative code, can support a bad faith claim, the what really is \”bad faith\” has been trivialized. The litmus test in many states for a defense against bad faith is that the issue was \”fairly debatable\” – in other words, the converse is that bad faith can only be found if there\’s no conceivable way a reasonble person could interpret the policy the way the insurer did. This law would result in any error, even a good faith mistake about the meaning or interpretation of a code section, supporting at least allegations of bad faith.
Who do you suppose ends up paying for this? The insurers? Not likely – even though some states bar use of bad faith settlement amounts in rate making, the fact is that most cases with bad faith allegations get settled – maybe for more than they are worth, but still, settled without specific allocation to bad faith.
As a result, there\’s upward pressure on severities, which feed right into the rate making process. In the end, EVERY insurance consumer pays more so a few people can bring bad faith cases, even where there is none.
Lawyers\’ Motto loud and clear: YOUR PAIN, OUR GREEDFUL GAIN.
Now let\’s see how the bar will redefine PAIN to guarantee their expected windfall begins at the lowest possible threshold.
Consider this: A high percentage of legislators are lawyers who will return to private practice after their government careers are done. The best way to ensure their post-legislative wealth is to use their power now to rig the rules in their favor. This is a disgraceful and very transparent conflict of interest. Legislatively speaking, the fox guards the henhouse in Washington.
Count Line hits the nail on the head!!!!!
That\’s why I maintain that no single \”party\” can or should be blamed for the state of things in this country.
We\’ve got lawyers on BOTH sides of the aisle. It is they who are making such a mess of things with their lies, dirty legislation and pocket-lining agendas; regardless of their political party affiliation.
I am totally amazed at the ignorance of some people, especially those that buy into the Insurance propoganda. Do you not read the papers!… Safeco CEO made over $17,000,000.00 in her first year!… that is why rates increase. Want to fix the problem??? Insurance companies should play fair instead of victimizing thier own insureds so that the CEO can make millions and millions, can\’t wait to see what she makes next year!
Every time someone wants to \”ship lawyers off to some island,\” I just cringe. People don\’t like lawyers because they are paid to take on difficult problems – like when an insurance company refuses to pay for a medical procedure, even though the doctor the insurer hired to evaluate it says its necessary.
I know a lot of lawyers, and the overwhelming majority of them just want their client to be treated fairly.
Fortunately bad faith is the exception and not the rule. But why should we shut out those who have truly been wronged because you don\’t like the fact that someone got a lawyer to help them? I know its easy to say, but if it were you that couldn\’t get an insurer to pay your legitimate claim wouldn\’t you want a lawyer\’s help?
I work on the legal end of the insurance industry and you\’re right, Steve. Some lawyers just want what is right and just for their clients.
But…
Having gone out for cocktails on numerous occasions with attorneys from work or attorneys from other firms; and after many candid conversations, I can tell you that most of the ones I know aren\’t in it for their health. In fact, a lot of them have very creative ways of \”billing time\” which inflates their profits significantly.
You\’re right in that it isn\’t fair for us to blindly stereotype all attorneys as greedy and money-hungry.
Unfortunately, I know too many who are crazy with greed and go beyond fighting for what is fair, instead fighting for every dime they can squeeze out of the opposing party. There comes a point where it is more about winning than it is about what is right.
I feel the same way about politicians. There are a few (precious few) who are really in it for the people. Sadly, I truly do believe the majority of them are crooks, both Republicans and Democrats equally.
The public is slowly catching on to trial bar efforts to hijack our courts. The trial bar is essentially asking for a hand out based not on the facts of their case but on intimidation. No one likes a bully, especially one afraid of a fair fight.
This thing is, it\’s not just lawyers and politicians. I\’ve worked with retailers and brokers for 10 years now, and have never met a single one that wasn\’t almost completely obsessed with money. I have watched as they lie about when they recieved bind requests, lied about losses, lied about losing emails and lied about knowing material facts that they know would disqualify a risk. It\’s very easy to sit back and slam lawyers for being unethical ambulance chasers, but the fact is that I\’ve met many of both, and by far, without any doubt, insurance sales professionals like retailers and brokers are generally much less scrupulous and much more dishonest than lawyers.
Lawyers go through long expensive schooling and yes, many are ultra competitive, and yes, there are those that come up with \”creative\” ways to bill, but that is certainly not the norm as everyone thinks. My brother is a lawyer, and I know many others that he works with and went to school with, and they would not risk being disbarred to bill a few extra hours. Lawyers can be disbarred for many things and believe me, it\’s on the front of all their minds before they do anything.
Same thing goes for agents who do not want to lose their licenses. I have had my license for 27 years and I would not lie, cheat or steal from any client. There are bad apples in every profession.