My question is: where was the American Insurance Association, the Property Casualty Insurers Assoc. of America and the Insurance Council of NJ when the NJ legislature was preparing the rewritten statute w/o including the verbal tort threshold of a “serious life impact?” Surely, they (or their lobbyists) were aware of the rewritten statute’s content before it was passed…
I was an adjuster for 7 years in NJ and I handled claims in all 50 states. By far, NJ was the worst. Fraud runs rampant almost to a point where it is epidemic. In other states where 1 in 8 minor accidents resulted in BI claims, it was more like 7 in 8 presented BI claims in NJ. The company I worked for lost enough money in that state alone to wipe out their profits for the rest of the country. As a result, they stopped writing business there and considered leaving the state all together. The threshold and their no fault system is a joke. Everyone met it by treating a long time and through bogus medical practitioners willing to say it was permanent. The funny side to it is that their own carrier funded their claims against the at fault carrier through their pip coverage. When someone started to treat with a chiro we would have to send them to an independent medical exam which we paid for and have their treatment cut off and then they would just start treating with another type of doctor such as neurologist etc and we would have to repeat the process. Basically you could not cut off your own client’s treatment, which allowed them to run up big bills to then use against the other carrier in their BI claim. NJ does and will continue to pay premiums that the average person cannot afford because of their liberal courts and legislature.
One step forward, two steps back. Typical of the law makers of our state. E. Drew Britcher president of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America-NJ stated “The consumers of NJ are better off today than they were yesterday” I think the only consumers that will be better off will be the trial lawyers that will push thousands more frivolous lawsuites through our courts.
I remain amazed at the alacrity with which people run to defend insurance companies. Nine times out of ten, though, these are people who aren’t very well educated on the subject. Insurance companies have held out the carrot of reduced rates, but the 15% savings that the average driver realizes is nothing compared to the amount of money that the insurance companies have saved. I’m not a personal injury lawyer or an insurance salesman, but you don’t need to be either in order to realize that this legislation has victimized many seriously injured people.
New Jersey auto insurers were happy with AICRA when it was passed in 1998, entirely eliminating three of the previous nine categories of compensable injury (including temporary injuries) and toughening standards in others. Four years later, they got an additional windfall when, without any statutory authority, an appellate court put even more restrictions on the rights of accident victims. Now the state Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that the Legislature meant what it said and said what it meant, no more and no less, and has given back to the people rights that were wrongly taken away by a misguided lower court. The law is now exactly where it was when passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor–and applauded by the insurance industry.
Franklin P. Solomon
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
210 Lake Drive East, Suite 101
Cherry Hill, NJ 08002
Counsel for plaintiff, Christina DiProspero
Mr. Solomon, Spoken like a true trial lawyer. I hope your auto policy premium skyrockets like the rest of us. You have done a disservice to the people of New Jersey. We finally have competition in New Jersey for auto insurance and then this. What a set back for New Jersey. What is next, taking away credit scoring on policies? In one swift move, the LIBERAL NJ Supreme Court has done away with the threshold in New Jersey. There should now be no choice needed, verbal or no threshold because it no longer matters. No don’t get me wrong, I love higher premiums and so do the insurance companies! But, that is not the right direction. Things were looking good for New Jersey auto insurance… Companies were returning to the State. Now… well.. I quess Progressive Insurance Company who is thinking of entering the state might now think twice. Maybe they were smart not to enter too fast, wait and see. They saw alright! New Jersey is bad news again for auto insurance thanks to the Trial Lawyers. We can only hope that the NJ Legislature will ammend the ARCIA and close the “loophole” you have created Mr. Solomon. I know many who have already spoken with their representatives to do just that. I think that all the insurance agents and companies doing business in New Jersey will publish your phone number and address to their clients so that you can explain to them why their auto insurance rates are again going up up up.
You obviously have NO CLUE about insurance at all as you state in your previous post. EVERYBODY thinks that they know about insurance, AND THEY DON’T! Maybe when you have 15+ years in the insurance industry, day in and day out, you could have something constructive to say. “A little Knowledge is a Dangerous thing” applies to your last post. Just wait and see what happens to your auto insurance rates in the near future. I predict that within 1 years time, premiums will increase at a minimum of at least $150.00 a car. And, that is only in the first year! I will let you in on a secret…. The auto insurance companies in NJ are already running the numbers on their exisiting open claims that will be affected by this ruling and are almost ready to adjust their rates upward within the next month or so. That does not even take into consideration future claims that will be affected by the ruling. Remember how hard it was to even get car insurance in New Jersey before the reforms? Well, back we go to those days again. The ONLY one to profit from this LIBERAL COURT ruling are the trial attorneys.
If the “spirit” of this action results in the elinination of any real difference between these definitions then it has in fact changed the way insurance carriers interpreted and charged for these coverages.
To be fair to all, it is not a liberal or conservative issue.
It is an issue to be feared however. The average consumer will NEVER feel sorry for an insurance company, and therein lies a large problem. The carriers probably bought reinsurance based upon the prior definition. Since this has now changed (yes I know some say it is now being properly interpreted) it will have an affect.
For those who do not understand what this means, imagine for a moment that your local town said they misinterpreted your taxes for the past few years, and going forward. They can’t collect from you on the past… what do you think will happen for your future taxes ?
We should realize, no matter what side if the issue you are one that this is Real Money were talking about, it has to come from somewhere and no the insurance companies are not dripping in it. If the carriers were that rich, then the only stocks I would buy would be insurance. Sorry (to those in the business) but they just are not that appealing.
Why would any person say that a court that has strickly interpreted legislation as to aply the clear language of a statute is “Liberal” is beyond me. I guess that “strict construction” only aplies if it upholds some right wing agenda.
My question is: where was the American Insurance Association, the Property Casualty Insurers Assoc. of America and the Insurance Council of NJ when the NJ legislature was preparing the rewritten statute w/o including the verbal tort threshold of a “serious life impact?” Surely, they (or their lobbyists) were aware of the rewritten statute’s content before it was passed…
I was an adjuster for 7 years in NJ and I handled claims in all 50 states. By far, NJ was the worst. Fraud runs rampant almost to a point where it is epidemic. In other states where 1 in 8 minor accidents resulted in BI claims, it was more like 7 in 8 presented BI claims in NJ. The company I worked for lost enough money in that state alone to wipe out their profits for the rest of the country. As a result, they stopped writing business there and considered leaving the state all together. The threshold and their no fault system is a joke. Everyone met it by treating a long time and through bogus medical practitioners willing to say it was permanent. The funny side to it is that their own carrier funded their claims against the at fault carrier through their pip coverage. When someone started to treat with a chiro we would have to send them to an independent medical exam which we paid for and have their treatment cut off and then they would just start treating with another type of doctor such as neurologist etc and we would have to repeat the process. Basically you could not cut off your own client’s treatment, which allowed them to run up big bills to then use against the other carrier in their BI claim. NJ does and will continue to pay premiums that the average person cannot afford because of their liberal courts and legislature.
One step forward, two steps back. Typical of the law makers of our state. E. Drew Britcher president of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America-NJ stated “The consumers of NJ are better off today than they were yesterday” I think the only consumers that will be better off will be the trial lawyers that will push thousands more frivolous lawsuites through our courts.
Hi Former Adjuster,
I would like to discuss NJ NF with you more in depth please email me @ EFoster711@aol.com…. I have a few questions regarding NJ…
I remain amazed at the alacrity with which people run to defend insurance companies. Nine times out of ten, though, these are people who aren’t very well educated on the subject. Insurance companies have held out the carrot of reduced rates, but the 15% savings that the average driver realizes is nothing compared to the amount of money that the insurance companies have saved. I’m not a personal injury lawyer or an insurance salesman, but you don’t need to be either in order to realize that this legislation has victimized many seriously injured people.
New Jersey auto insurers were happy with AICRA when it was passed in 1998, entirely eliminating three of the previous nine categories of compensable injury (including temporary injuries) and toughening standards in others. Four years later, they got an additional windfall when, without any statutory authority, an appellate court put even more restrictions on the rights of accident victims. Now the state Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that the Legislature meant what it said and said what it meant, no more and no less, and has given back to the people rights that were wrongly taken away by a misguided lower court. The law is now exactly where it was when passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor–and applauded by the insurance industry.
Franklin P. Solomon
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
210 Lake Drive East, Suite 101
Cherry Hill, NJ 08002
Counsel for plaintiff, Christina DiProspero
Mr. Solomon, Spoken like a true trial lawyer. I hope your auto policy premium skyrockets like the rest of us. You have done a disservice to the people of New Jersey. We finally have competition in New Jersey for auto insurance and then this. What a set back for New Jersey. What is next, taking away credit scoring on policies? In one swift move, the LIBERAL NJ Supreme Court has done away with the threshold in New Jersey. There should now be no choice needed, verbal or no threshold because it no longer matters. No don’t get me wrong, I love higher premiums and so do the insurance companies! But, that is not the right direction. Things were looking good for New Jersey auto insurance… Companies were returning to the State. Now… well.. I quess Progressive Insurance Company who is thinking of entering the state might now think twice. Maybe they were smart not to enter too fast, wait and see. They saw alright! New Jersey is bad news again for auto insurance thanks to the Trial Lawyers. We can only hope that the NJ Legislature will ammend the ARCIA and close the “loophole” you have created Mr. Solomon. I know many who have already spoken with their representatives to do just that. I think that all the insurance agents and companies doing business in New Jersey will publish your phone number and address to their clients so that you can explain to them why their auto insurance rates are again going up up up.
You obviously have NO CLUE about insurance at all as you state in your previous post. EVERYBODY thinks that they know about insurance, AND THEY DON’T! Maybe when you have 15+ years in the insurance industry, day in and day out, you could have something constructive to say. “A little Knowledge is a Dangerous thing” applies to your last post. Just wait and see what happens to your auto insurance rates in the near future. I predict that within 1 years time, premiums will increase at a minimum of at least $150.00 a car. And, that is only in the first year! I will let you in on a secret…. The auto insurance companies in NJ are already running the numbers on their exisiting open claims that will be affected by this ruling and are almost ready to adjust their rates upward within the next month or so. That does not even take into consideration future claims that will be affected by the ruling. Remember how hard it was to even get car insurance in New Jersey before the reforms? Well, back we go to those days again. The ONLY one to profit from this LIBERAL COURT ruling are the trial attorneys.
To My Fellow Friends on both sides of the Aisle.
NJ has had a verbal and non verbal threshold.
If the “spirit” of this action results in the elinination of any real difference between these definitions then it has in fact changed the way insurance carriers interpreted and charged for these coverages.
To be fair to all, it is not a liberal or conservative issue.
It is an issue to be feared however. The average consumer will NEVER feel sorry for an insurance company, and therein lies a large problem. The carriers probably bought reinsurance based upon the prior definition. Since this has now changed (yes I know some say it is now being properly interpreted) it will have an affect.
For those who do not understand what this means, imagine for a moment that your local town said they misinterpreted your taxes for the past few years, and going forward. They can’t collect from you on the past… what do you think will happen for your future taxes ?
We should realize, no matter what side if the issue you are one that this is Real Money were talking about, it has to come from somewhere and no the insurance companies are not dripping in it. If the carriers were that rich, then the only stocks I would buy would be insurance. Sorry (to those in the business) but they just are not that appealing.
Why would any person say that a court that has strickly interpreted legislation as to aply the clear language of a statute is “Liberal” is beyond me. I guess that “strict construction” only aplies if it upholds some right wing agenda.
No wonder why you guys lost. 15+ in the insurance industry and cannot spell AICRA
(Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act). I never heard of ARCIA.
NO MORE LAWSUITS!