Syndicate
|
The Lance Firm Personal Injury and Law Blog
|
Which Insurance Company is the Best and Which is the Worst? |
I am often asked by friends and clients what my opinion is regarding cetain insurance companies. In addition, I am asked to recommend "a good one." Instead of recommending any company, I usually suggesst companies people should avoid. To help them in this regard, I refer to this press release.
Allstate Ranks as Worst Insurer for Consumers
Insurance Industry Employs “Deny, Delay, Defend” Strategy, Puts Profits Over Policyholders
Washington, DC—Allstate ranks as the worst insurer for consumers, according to a comprehensive investigation of thousands of legal documents and financial filings.
The rankings show a distinct pattern of insurance industry greed amongst 10 companies that refuse to pay just claims, employ hardball tactics against policyholders, reward executives with extravagant salaries, and raise premiums while hoarding excessive profits.
“While Allstate publicly touts its ‘good hands’ approach, it has instead privately instructed its agents to employ a ‘boxing gloves’ strategy against its policyholders,” said American Association for Justice CEO Jon Haber. “Allstate ducks, bobs and weaves to avoid paying claims to increase its profits.”
Allstate (NYSE: ALL) set the standard for insurance company greed and placing profits over policyholders. Allstate contracted with consulting giant McKinsey & Co. in the mid-1990s to systematically force consumers to accept lowball claims or face its “boxing gloves,” an aggressive strategy designed to deny claims at any cost. One Allstate employee reported that supervisors told agents to lie and blame fires on arson, and in turn, were rewarded with portable fridges.
Thousands of court documents, materials uncovered from litigation and discovery, testimony, complaints filed with state insurance departments, SEC and FBI records, and news accounts were reviewed to compile the rankings and statistics.
The rest of the rankings are as follows:
2. Unum (NYSE: UNM) – Unum’s actions are even more shameful considering the type of insurance it sells: disability. Unum’s behavior was epitomized when it denied the claim of a woman with multiple sclerosis for three years, stating her conditions were “self-reported,” contrary to doctors’ evaluations. In 2005, Unum agreed to a settlement with insurance commissioners from 48 states over their practices.
3. AIG (NYSE: AIG) – The world’s biggest insurer, AIG’s slogan was “we know money.” AIG, described by commentators as “the new Enron,” has engaged in massive corporate fraud and claims abuses. In 2006, the company paid $1.6 billion to settle a host of charges.
4. State Farm – State Farm is notorious for its deny and delay tactics, and like Allstate, hired McKinsey consultants. State Farm’s true motives became apparent during Hurricane Katrina; for example, it employed multiple engineering firms until they could deny the claims of the Nguyen family of Mississippi. In April 2007, State Farm agreed to re-evaluate more than 3,000 Hurricane Katrina claims.
5. Conseco (NYSE: CNO) – Conseco sells long-term care policies, typically to the elderly. Amongst its egregious behavior, the insurer “made it so hard to make a claim that people either died or gave up,” said a former Conseco-subsidiary agent. Former Conseco executives were fined when they admitted to filing misleading financial statements with regulators.
6. WellPoint (NYSE: WLP) – Health insurer WellPoint has a long history of putting profits ahead of policyholders. For instance, California fined a WellPoint subsidiary in March 2007 after an investigation revealed that the insurer routinely canceled policies of pregnant women and chronically ill patients.
7. Farmers – Swiss-owned Farmers Insurance Group consistently ranks at or near the bottom of homeowner satisfaction surveys, and for good reason. For example, Farmers had an incentive program called “Quest for Gold” that offered pizza parties to its adjusters that met low claims payments goals. Like Allstate, it also hired the McKinsey consultants.
8. UnitedHealth (NYSE: UNH) – The SEC opened an investigation into former UnitedHealth CEO William McGuire for stock backdating, which ultimately led to his ouster in 2006 and returning $620 million in stock gains and retirement compensation. Physicians have also reported that their reimbursements are so low and delayed by the company that patient health is being compromised.
9. Torchmark (NYSE: TMK) – According to Hoover’s In-Depth Company Records, Torchmark’s very origins were little more than a scam devised to enrich its founder, Frank Samford. Torchmark has preyed on low-income Southern residents and charged minority policyholders more than whites on burial policies.
10. Liberty Mutual – Like Allstate and State Farm, Liberty Mutual hired consulting giant McKinsey to adopt aggressive tactics. Liberty’s tactics were highlighted when a New York couple’s insurance was “nonrenewed” by Liberty, even though they lived 12 miles from the coast and never experienced weather-related flooding.
Financial documents also revealed extravagant profits and executive compensation while policyholders’ claims were routinely delayed and denied:
- Over the last 10 years, the property / casualty and life / health insurance industries have each enjoyed annual profits exceeding $30 billion.
- The insurance industry takes in over $1 trillion in premiums every year. It has $3.8 trillion in assets, more than the GDPs of all but two countries.
- The CEOs of the top 10 property / casualty firms earned an average of $8.9 million in 2007. The CEOs of the top 10 life / health insurance earned an average of $9.1 million.
- The median insurance CEO’s cash compensation is $1.6 million per year, leading all industries.
http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/xchg/justice/hs.xsl/2323.htm
|
|
Colt Rushton v. Gary Coleman, status, depositions and updates |
|
So, we took Gary Coleman and Shannon Price's depositions on February 19, 2009. The depositions were taken in Provo, Utah, at the law offices of Flickinger & Sutterfield because either Gary and/or Shannon was unwilling to travel to my law firm's office in Salt Lake City. Shannon Price went first and her deposition lasted around two and a half hours. Gary Coleman's deposition was second and lasted about the same amount of time. Gary was in the room for all of Shannon's deposition, however, Shannon left the office for all of Gary's deposition. Terry Plant of Plant Christensen & Kanell represented both Gary and Shannon in their depositions. The depositions were recored by a certified court reporter, Cathy Kennedy, from DepomaxMerit. In addition, DepomaxMerit had a certified videographer record video both depositions.
Anyone that has followed the case already knows that, pursuant to Gary Coleman's request, Fourth District Judge Samuel McVey ruled that the videotaped deposition of Gary Coleman won’t be released to the public until the personal injury lawsuit against the actor over the incident at the Payson bowling alley is settled.
On Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, the Judge said that he was worried about whether there would be a fair trial if people in a jury pool had seen the deposition video on YouTube or something similar. Article The Judge did not apply any special protections beyond the standard rules for Gary Coleman's deposition transcript or for any either part of Shannon Price's deposition. Don't ask me if that means that copies of Shannon's video or eithers' transcripts are available for the press (several have already called). I do not know. I will refer all such inquiries to DepomaxMerit.
I think the depositions went quite well and lots of useful testimony was gathered. In fact, based on what was said by Gary Coleman and Shannon Price in their depositions, I am looking at preparing and filing a Motion for Summary Judgment against Shannon Price for all of the claims made against her in the incident. I doubt the same will be filed against Gary Coleman and it looks like we will forced into a trial on the case against him, although, I will review the transcripts before making either of these decisions.
Updates will be provided at a later date.
Dustin Lance, Attorney for Colt Rushton
|
|
Auto Manufacturers and Product Liability |
|
Most people remember the Ford Pinto. Many of us took our high school drivers' education classes in these cars. One of the pinto's lasting memories involves Ford's decision to put the gas tank filler in the rear of the car behind the license plate. Not the brightest idea when you think of how many rear end accidents there are. Once Ford figured out that they had a serious safety problem, instead of recalling the car and making a relatively cheap repair, they performed a cost benefit analysis. Ford calculated the cost to repair all of the cars versus the cost to let people get hurt and / or die and the pprobability of lawsuit and just paying the judgements. It worked great for Ford until they got caught. When they got caught, the juries' verdicts were swift and painful. Hopefully manufacturers learned their lesson. Did they? If you ask a group of BMW owners, they would tell you NO.
In 2008, BMW introduced its updated M3 model (E90 / E92). For the first time, the new BMW offered a seven-speed dual-clutch transmission (DCT / DKG). Developed in conjunction with Getrag, the transmission was available as an option. Unfortunately, according to owners, problems with the new transmission appeared almost immediately.
First, BMW recalled 2500 of the 2008-2009 models with the double clutch transmission. According to the recall ((NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID Number: 08V595000)), in a rapid vehicle deceleration, the transmission may perform a multistage downshift resulting in a stall and possibly a crash. As part of the recall, BMW updated the transmission software to progman version 31.1 then 31.2 and finally 32.1. Sadly, according to M3 owners, the updated software addressed a rarely seen transmission failure, however, it created a now common, arguable more dangerous, transmission failure.
The new transmission problem, known to the M3 owners as the DCT lag or hesitation problem, presents during deceleration or a rolling stop situation which is followed by any acceleration, such as a changing traffic light or a left or right hand turn. When the driver tries to accelerate, there is a lag, hesitation or delay in the transmission and the vehicle has the feeling of an engine stall and losses all power for one to two seconds before finally regaining power and accelerating.
Many owners claim that this transmission failure was not present prior to the recall being performed but has been consistent since. The failure presents in both D and S modes regardless of the number of Drivelogic bars, however, it is most noticeable with three or fewer Drivelogic bars. Owners complain that many have narrowly avoided major accidents and serious injuries when the vehicle's transmission “hesitated” and they were unable to move out of the way of oncoming traffic. The most serious complaints of near accidents involve transmission hesitation and "lagging" on left hand turns. These transmission failures occurred mainly during normal (opposed to spirited) driving. Multiple owners have already logged complaints of hesitation and transmission lag issues with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
Shockingly, instead of immediately addressing this dangerous safety issue with the M DCT transmission, BMW issued a Technical Service Bulletin (SI B 28 07 08) which instructed BMW technicians “not to attempt any repair (software update or hardware replacement) for this type of complaint.” Instead, BMW claims that the lagging / hesitation problem is in fact a "design characteristic and normal behavior for the M DCT transmission, rather than a malfunction or deficiency." Owners vehemently disgree.
The Product Liability / Personal Injury Attorney at The Lance Firm is currently investigating these BMW M3 M DCT transmission failure complaints. If you or someone you know has suffered a personal injury in an accident involving a BMW M3 M DCT stall, lag or hesitation wreck, contact us today, a product liability lawyer at our law firm will discuss your options and legal rights.
|
|
A New blog post is coming soon!
|
|
Have some personal injury attorneys pushed it too far? |
|
OK. I am a personal injury trial lawyer. I know how people feel about me. However, even I think it can go to far. For example, would-be heroes were warned by the California Supreme Court on Thursday that they could be liable for damages if they inadvertently injure a person while attempting a rescue.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Decreasing the Cap for Non-Economic Damages Will Not Change Doctor Care |
|
Doctors are up in arms in many parts of the country, including Utah, surprised and outraged by medical malpractice premiums that have risen sharply.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
|
Contact Us:
Phone:
(801) 333-7300
170 South Main Street
Suite
1120
Salt Lake City , UT 84101
 |
