Neighbor’s excavator probably had inadequate limits. Either prices are going to have to go up a lot or we’re going to have to have Sandra Boynton write policies to deal with the courts undermining intent with these BS ambiguity arguments.
TO THE UNTOUCHABLES. Edward B. Rust, Jr., will be happy to tell you that he is the Chief Executive Officer of State Farm Mutual Insurance Company. He has deep family ties to State Farm, as his father and grand father have both served in that capacity. He will also tell you that he is an educated man who has been to law school and is a past practicing attorney. In addition, he was the chairman of the Coalition for Excellence in Education and a member of George W. Bush’s transition advisory team on education. So with all of that education why will he not deal with his company’s inbred greed. Does he not know that we are in the 21st century where anyone can look on the internet and see the billions of dollars that are being spent to protect their empire from the consumer? In Utah, the company was fine $25 million in punitive damages, in part for the “systematic destruction of documents and systematic manipulation of individual claim files to conceal claim mishandling”. An Idaho appeals court fined the company $9.5 million in punitive damages for making use of “a completely bogus” outside bill review company that helped lower the cost of medical bills. In October of 1999, an Illinois jury rendered a $456 million judgment against State Farm and an additional $730 million in punitive damages for the insurer’s breach of contract with auto policy holders by relying on generic replacement parts. Rust was adamant in his insistence that fraud had not been committed. A class action law suit in the name of State Farm policy holders was filed in 2003 for breach of contract and statutory consumer fraud in which $1.1 billion was awarded to plaintiffs. When a company is misleading the public, should that not be considered fraud? A consumer would go to prison for that type of behavior. State Farm will let you know that, in several states, fraud and abuse is pushing up the cost of auto insurance. A court in late 2001 reached an unfriendly consumer decision that could have the effect of reaching deep into the pockets of the consumer. Sharply higher jury awards in vehicular liability cases are putting additional upward pressure on auto insurance rates. The average jury award in auto liability cases rose from $187,000 to $269,000 in 2000, an increase of 44%. I question if any of the lawsuits would be necessary if the company would just fairly pay their claims. The company represents on their web-site that consumer protection is one of their most important goals, but do they really think that courts would be awarding multiple millions of dollars in bad faith claims if that were their emphasis? State Farm’s ratings are based on their financial strength. State Farm states that their high ratings are also based on strong claims paying ability. With this ability, why is it necessary for their policy holders to allege that the claims department was directed, in evaluating their cases, to take them to trial instead of settling within the limits of the policy? This practice exposed policyholders to judgments above the limits of their policies, when the company was attempting to make an effort to win smaller decisions. Two former in-house attorneys for State Farm contend that they were often called upon by the insurer to represent its’ policy holders and were forced to commit “unlawful and unethical activities, including requiring the two to stay silent about the rights of the policyholders”. State Farm seems to have reckless indifference for the truth for the purpose of corporate and personal economic gain. State Farm should know that continued scrutiny of their claims paying practices will continue especially with the advent of new claims that are surfacing from lawsuits revolving around Hurricane Katrina. A message to Mr. Rust, and any employee of the company that is acting in bad faith for its policy holders. Its time to stop no more.
State Farm has history of not releasing records
By Anita Lee
McClatchy Newspapers
Advertisement
BILOXI, Miss. (MCT) — In some cases, State Farm’s top leadership prefers not to share or even keep records that offer insight into how policyholder claims are handled, according to court records.
Chairman and CEO Edward B. Rust Jr. said in sworn testimony earlier this month that no minutes are kept of quarterly meetings held by the company’s top management, the Chairman’s Council, and that policyholders have no right to information about an investigation State Farm Insurance Cos. has ordered of its relationship with Haag Engineering Co.
State Farm spokesman Phil Supple said the company doesn’t “intend to-;try this-;case in the media.”
“State Farm stands by testimony given by President and Vice Chairman Vince Trosino, who said when asked about these allegations, ‘It’s not part of our system. It’s not part of our core values. It’s not what made us the most successful property and casualty insurer, life insurer, in the country.'”
Juries in two states, Texas and Oklahoma, have found Haag provided biased reports to State Farm to minimize or deny policyholder claims. Mississippi’s attorney general currently is conducting a grand jury investigation to determine whether State Farm and other insurers denied Hurricane Katrina claims through the use of fraudulent engineering reports.
Haag denies bias, but State Farm suspended business with the company in June and ordered an independent investigation after an Oklahoma jury awarded a total of $13 million to a policyholder over tornado damages. Subsequent trials are set to determine damages for 70 other policyholders, all of whom had claims investigated by Haag.
In past court cases, judges have chastised and even fined State Farm for withholding records the company was ordered to produce. Evidence the company destroyed documents has been presented in several cases.
In the Oklahoma case, after State Farm finally turned over to the court a “claims legal research” DVD and other records, Judge Richard G. Van Dyck told company attorneys
“As I was watching these tapes I just want to say this for the record, the hair on the back of my neck did — did stand up because I was seeing things there that early on in this case I was told by (State Farm) defense counsel didn’t exist and couldn’t be produced. So I’m not real happy with that and I want to remind all counsel that their ethical responsibilities as attorneys outweigh the wishes of their clients.”
Gary T. Fye, an expert in the analysis of disputed insurance claims who lives in Nevada, often testifies in insurance cases. Fye, who said he has testified on behalf of policyholders and insurance companies, has provided the courts information on State Farm’s history of destroying and withholding records.
In 1998, Fye wrote in a Florida case
“I have been witnessing document destruction, concealment, and obstruction of discovery by State Farm for many years in connection with my review of internal claim practices documents of the insurer. I have accumulated certain Exhibits which show the company’s goals and objectives for document handling by its employees. The documents show close to 28 years of intentional destruction, concealment and distortion of claim practices records.”
In some cases, company executives did not keep records.
Jeff Marr, the attorney suing State Farm in Oklahoma, took sworn testimony Sept. 6 from Rust. Topics included Rust’s Chairman’s Council, made up of top State Farm executives. The group, which includes the company’s general counsel, meets quarterly.
Marr was fishing for records of those meetings that he could subpoena for his lawsuit.
“Certainly,” Marr asked Rust, “you keep records of the quarterly meetings where the entire Chairman’s Council is present?”
“We have an agenda,” Rust said, “but minutes in that, no.”
“Why not?” Marr asked.
Rust replied, “Never felt a need to.”
Marr later asked, “Are there any written agendas that are available should I choose to request them in the lawsuit?”
“I’m not sure what might be available,” Rust said.
Rust also said policyholders, who essentially own the private mutual company, are not entitled to know what the Chairman’s Council discusses or decides about litigation against State Farm, citing attorney-client privilege.
Marr questioned why the company would withhold information from policyholders, who own State Farm.
“Well, again,” said Rust (who has a law degree), “I’m not an expert in the area, but I think as you find — even if I’m a shareholder in a publicly traded company, there are things that are not — you know, I do not have access to.”
Marr later asked if policyholders have a right to see documents from State Farm’s investigation of Haag.
$25 million in punitive damages . $9.5 million in punitive damages for making use of “a completely bogus” outside bill review company.Illinois jury rendered a $456 million judgment against State Farm and an additional $730 million in punitive damages for the insurer’s breach of contrac.2003 for breach of contract and statutory consumer fraud in which $1.1 billion was awarded to plaintiffsThe average jury award in auto liability cases rose from $187,000 to $269,000 in 2000, an increase of 44%. I question if any of the lawsuits would be necessary if the company would just fairly pay their claims.
i think the court did this correctly. if was the adjoining lot, then s.f should pay, because there was no construction on the current lot of the condo. agreed, that s.f. needs to subgro against the construction company. they should have known as engineers, that it could affect buildings next to it.
Looks like State Farm and the contractors on the ajacent lot weren’t good such neighbors in this one.
Looks like State Farm and the contractors on the ajacent lot weren’t such good neighbors in this one.
SF will simply subrogate against the excavating contractor…as they should.
It’s not as if State Farm would not have sought remedy through subrogation!
Claims practices 101 – deny, deny, deny.
Neighbor’s excavator probably had inadequate limits. Either prices are going to have to go up a lot or we’re going to have to have Sandra Boynton write policies to deal with the courts undermining intent with these BS ambiguity arguments.
used earth movement exclusion to deny coverage to an insured whose property was damaged
TO THE UNTOUCHABLES. Edward B. Rust, Jr., will be happy to tell you that he is the Chief Executive Officer of State Farm Mutual Insurance Company. He has deep family ties to State Farm, as his father and grand father have both served in that capacity. He will also tell you that he is an educated man who has been to law school and is a past practicing attorney. In addition, he was the chairman of the Coalition for Excellence in Education and a member of George W. Bush’s transition advisory team on education. So with all of that education why will he not deal with his company’s inbred greed. Does he not know that we are in the 21st century where anyone can look on the internet and see the billions of dollars that are being spent to protect their empire from the consumer? In Utah, the company was fine $25 million in punitive damages, in part for the “systematic destruction of documents and systematic manipulation of individual claim files to conceal claim mishandling”. An Idaho appeals court fined the company $9.5 million in punitive damages for making use of “a completely bogus” outside bill review company that helped lower the cost of medical bills. In October of 1999, an Illinois jury rendered a $456 million judgment against State Farm and an additional $730 million in punitive damages for the insurer’s breach of contract with auto policy holders by relying on generic replacement parts. Rust was adamant in his insistence that fraud had not been committed. A class action law suit in the name of State Farm policy holders was filed in 2003 for breach of contract and statutory consumer fraud in which $1.1 billion was awarded to plaintiffs. When a company is misleading the public, should that not be considered fraud? A consumer would go to prison for that type of behavior. State Farm will let you know that, in several states, fraud and abuse is pushing up the cost of auto insurance. A court in late 2001 reached an unfriendly consumer decision that could have the effect of reaching deep into the pockets of the consumer. Sharply higher jury awards in vehicular liability cases are putting additional upward pressure on auto insurance rates. The average jury award in auto liability cases rose from $187,000 to $269,000 in 2000, an increase of 44%. I question if any of the lawsuits would be necessary if the company would just fairly pay their claims. The company represents on their web-site that consumer protection is one of their most important goals, but do they really think that courts would be awarding multiple millions of dollars in bad faith claims if that were their emphasis? State Farm’s ratings are based on their financial strength. State Farm states that their high ratings are also based on strong claims paying ability. With this ability, why is it necessary for their policy holders to allege that the claims department was directed, in evaluating their cases, to take them to trial instead of settling within the limits of the policy? This practice exposed policyholders to judgments above the limits of their policies, when the company was attempting to make an effort to win smaller decisions. Two former in-house attorneys for State Farm contend that they were often called upon by the insurer to represent its’ policy holders and were forced to commit “unlawful and unethical activities, including requiring the two to stay silent about the rights of the policyholders”. State Farm seems to have reckless indifference for the truth for the purpose of corporate and personal economic gain. State Farm should know that continued scrutiny of their claims paying practices will continue especially with the advent of new claims that are surfacing from lawsuits revolving around Hurricane Katrina. A message to Mr. Rust, and any employee of the company that is acting in bad faith for its policy holders. Its time to stop no more.
State Farm has history of not releasing records
By Anita Lee
McClatchy Newspapers
Advertisement
BILOXI, Miss. (MCT) — In some cases, State Farm’s top leadership prefers not to share or even keep records that offer insight into how policyholder claims are handled, according to court records.
Chairman and CEO Edward B. Rust Jr. said in sworn testimony earlier this month that no minutes are kept of quarterly meetings held by the company’s top management, the Chairman’s Council, and that policyholders have no right to information about an investigation State Farm Insurance Cos. has ordered of its relationship with Haag Engineering Co.
State Farm spokesman Phil Supple said the company doesn’t “intend to-;try this-;case in the media.”
“State Farm stands by testimony given by President and Vice Chairman Vince Trosino, who said when asked about these allegations, ‘It’s not part of our system. It’s not part of our core values. It’s not what made us the most successful property and casualty insurer, life insurer, in the country.'”
Juries in two states, Texas and Oklahoma, have found Haag provided biased reports to State Farm to minimize or deny policyholder claims. Mississippi’s attorney general currently is conducting a grand jury investigation to determine whether State Farm and other insurers denied Hurricane Katrina claims through the use of fraudulent engineering reports.
Haag denies bias, but State Farm suspended business with the company in June and ordered an independent investigation after an Oklahoma jury awarded a total of $13 million to a policyholder over tornado damages. Subsequent trials are set to determine damages for 70 other policyholders, all of whom had claims investigated by Haag.
In past court cases, judges have chastised and even fined State Farm for withholding records the company was ordered to produce. Evidence the company destroyed documents has been presented in several cases.
In the Oklahoma case, after State Farm finally turned over to the court a “claims legal research” DVD and other records, Judge Richard G. Van Dyck told company attorneys
“As I was watching these tapes I just want to say this for the record, the hair on the back of my neck did — did stand up because I was seeing things there that early on in this case I was told by (State Farm) defense counsel didn’t exist and couldn’t be produced. So I’m not real happy with that and I want to remind all counsel that their ethical responsibilities as attorneys outweigh the wishes of their clients.”
Gary T. Fye, an expert in the analysis of disputed insurance claims who lives in Nevada, often testifies in insurance cases. Fye, who said he has testified on behalf of policyholders and insurance companies, has provided the courts information on State Farm’s history of destroying and withholding records.
In 1998, Fye wrote in a Florida case
“I have been witnessing document destruction, concealment, and obstruction of discovery by State Farm for many years in connection with my review of internal claim practices documents of the insurer. I have accumulated certain Exhibits which show the company’s goals and objectives for document handling by its employees. The documents show close to 28 years of intentional destruction, concealment and distortion of claim practices records.”
In some cases, company executives did not keep records.
Jeff Marr, the attorney suing State Farm in Oklahoma, took sworn testimony Sept. 6 from Rust. Topics included Rust’s Chairman’s Council, made up of top State Farm executives. The group, which includes the company’s general counsel, meets quarterly.
Marr was fishing for records of those meetings that he could subpoena for his lawsuit.
“Certainly,” Marr asked Rust, “you keep records of the quarterly meetings where the entire Chairman’s Council is present?”
“We have an agenda,” Rust said, “but minutes in that, no.”
“Why not?” Marr asked.
Rust replied, “Never felt a need to.”
Marr later asked, “Are there any written agendas that are available should I choose to request them in the lawsuit?”
“I’m not sure what might be available,” Rust said.
Rust also said policyholders, who essentially own the private mutual company, are not entitled to know what the Chairman’s Council discusses or decides about litigation against State Farm, citing attorney-client privilege.
Marr questioned why the company would withhold information from policyholders, who own State Farm.
“Well, again,” said Rust (who has a law degree), “I’m not an expert in the area, but I think as you find — even if I’m a shareholder in a publicly traded company, there are things that are not — you know, I do not have access to.”
Marr later asked if policyholders have a right to see documents from State Farm’s investigation of Haag.
“No,” Rust said.
“Why not?” Marr asked. “Is it privileged?”
Rust said, “I believe so.”
(c) 2006, The Sun Herald (Biloxi, Miss.).
$25 million in punitive damages . $9.5 million in punitive damages for making use of “a completely bogus” outside bill review company.Illinois jury rendered a $456 million judgment against State Farm and an additional $730 million in punitive damages for the insurer’s breach of contrac.2003 for breach of contract and statutory consumer fraud in which $1.1 billion was awarded to plaintiffsThe average jury award in auto liability cases rose from $187,000 to $269,000 in 2000, an increase of 44%. I question if any of the lawsuits would be necessary if the company would just fairly pay their claims.
i think the court did this correctly. if was the adjoining lot, then s.f should pay, because there was no construction on the current lot of the condo. agreed, that s.f. needs to subgro against the construction company. they should have known as engineers, that it could affect buildings next to it.
The solution to all of these problems would be to write the lanquage much more clearly than it is.
My father used to say that attorneys wrote wrote everything in gray to make more green.
It is either covered or it is not. Why is it that the policy lanquage is written to confuse rather than clarify?
Regards,