The only crisis that exists is insurance carriers not paying on claims across the board. 80% of all litigation is because of that fact. Even with that being said ask all of the house counsel of Allstate, Farmers and 21st Century who were just laid off here in California because of lack of work whether there is a litigation crises. If there is one, it did not hit their now empty desks. They may have a few choice words for their former masters. The tort “crisis” is a figment of Bush et.als., imagination. Business does not want anybody playing in their money sandbox and so therefore a false crisis is created much like we saw with the Iraq war to convince the uinformed that reform must take place in the world of tort. If the reform does not take place, our economic world will collapse. The sky is falling. People continue to give up their rights , be they privacy rights or tort rights because someone with a bible wrapped with the American flag says that is what they should do. Even giving up our right to a secure border trumps the right of business to have access to cheap labor. One of these days we as a country will wake up to see the harm this administration is foisting on each one of us in the name of freedom, liberty and the pursuit of unfettered profits for the business community. The insurance industry needs no help from government. Consumers do need help fighting an industry that is bloated with profits. AIG is just one of many examples. I need not go further. I know this is not flattering for the industry and I don’t expect this to be posted in your print edition.
It depends, I believe, on the adage of whose ox is being gored. Studies always say what the sponsosr wishes of them. There is some merit in the contention that present administrative policies in the Bush White House affect info. Sounds a lot like the alleged Medical Liability “crisis.” Oh yeah, how about NO FAULT being a wonderful thing for the masses.
Tillinghast is correct. Tort reform will benefit the consumer about as much as HSAs. Wise up people, the real problem lies within the fuzzy math of the reinsurers and the States not imposing high enough reserve requirements of mutual/recprical/stock companies. IT’s too diversified, this drives up rates year after year, puts the consumer more at risk for an insurer insolvency. You’ld be rich if your millionaire uncle left you a million bucks but you wouldn’t be if you had to share it with a 1000 relatives.
You’re living in a dream world if you think that the tort crisis is a made up phenomenon.
Let us distinguish between liability lines of insurance and other lines. For in the other lines, tort costs are high due to bad faith claims and others that may or may not be justified. I can’t comment on this.
However, in the liability lines, the crisis does not arise from insurers not paying in 80% of the cases as Chris Russell alleges. If an insurer doesn’t fight the majority of the liability allegations (except those that are obvious), do you realize how many lawyers and plaintiffs would come out of the woodwork? When medical malpractice plaintiffs get paid upwards of 50 million dollars in PUNITIVE damages, we have a problem. When doctors and nurses are so concerned with dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s so much with their documentation because of fear of lawsuits, we have a problem. When hospitals spend more money paying malpractice costs rather than on nurses, we have a problem
In reply to LLCJ the only time that I am in a “dream world” is usually when I am asleep or ‘working.” In point of fact there is no liability crisis. There is a crisis with insurance management and ethics if you believe the “latest” investigations going on in NY state via their AG’s investigationb into pricing, etc. Normally claims management does not dictate the philosophy of a carrier. Claims must respond to the scenario created. You need to review stats with the Insurance Commissioners and varous Federal Agencies that publish their stuff to find out if there ‘EVER WAS’ a medical liabillity crisis. There isn’t. There is no Liability Crisis…that is just a crock.
For 5 years rates have gone up across the board. Profits have soared. International investment in American Insurance Companies and Groups have increased dramatically. Wow, does that tell you about a crisis? Oh yeah, after 30 years in my business I can comment on Liabillity and Bad Faith…which is also liability. The present administration-speaking of Mr. Bush and his group are leading the way on one problem after another ; even when it is necessary to create problems. My opinion.
You obviously don’t see teh complete picture from an insurer point of view. Record profits are for those companies that have multiple lines of business who can use other lines to prop up the liability lines.
There is a crisis and it is well documented not just by Tillinghast Towers Perrin, but numerous other sources. hospitals are closing, doctors are moving to avoid high premium costs. 99% of medical malpractice insurers operate at a 125% loss ratio. The only way they make money is that they invest the dollars. Since it takes multiple years to settle med mal claims, this is still a viable way of doing business.
You are a claims person. Read some actuarlial studies before commenting. Then perhaps you won’t sound so politically motivated in your comments.
In response to LLCJ’s comment, it is always interesting when numbers are thrown out with no support. When was the last time (or ever) a dr got nailed for 50 million dollars in punitive damages? Details are never given b/c the information is based on fabrication in order to incite the public. The same old lies get told over and over again until people believe them. Insurance companies fight obvious claims every day. Once again ask all of the defense house counsel who were just let go here in California if there are too many claims. Don’t believe me, call and find out yourself. The “frivilous” lawsuit cry is such a crock since no atty that works on contingency would take such a claim since the liklihood of making money from it is nil. If carriers barely ever pay fair value on legitiamte claims, why would they ever pay any money on a frivilous claim? Again, if the lie is said long enough and loud enough the unsuspecting public begins to believe it. With the carriers having billions at their disposal, they can afford to spread the lies to their benefit.
These are 2002 statistics obtained from a Greater New York Hospital Association Med Malpractice Insurance Costs and Coverage report published in January 2005.. These statistics were taken from the independent verdictsearch.com:
Top 10 malpractice verdicts of 2002:
1. 94.8 Million (NY)
2. 90.9 Million (NY)
3. 80 Million (NY)
4. 78.5 Million (FL)
5. 64 Million (NY
6. 61.7 Million (NY)
7. 59.3 Million (CA)
8. 56.1 Million (NY)
9. 43.5 Million (CA)
10. 25.9 Millino (NY)
From the same report, Malpractice companies’ loss ratios and combined ratios. Loss ratio=(Ultimate loss+Defence costs)/premium, combined ratio=(Ultimate Loss+defence Costs+U/W expenses)/Premium:
The evidence is there. The data is there. When you make assertions, make sure you have credible evidence to back yourself up, not just years of personal experience. Data is freely available.
Forget for a moment the emotive elements of Big Bad Corporations vs. Sleazoid Lawyers. The fact is, it costs a total of $2.50 to $3.00 to get $1.00 to an injured claimant. The system/process sucks up a ridiculous share of the common funds to cover injury. And for all we are made to spend on this expensive fact-finding, the objective, substantive quality of the outcomes (think Bendectin, Breast implants, PCBs, perinatally-caused CP) is very poor. We pay a lot and we get a slowly generated often stupid verdicts.
Caps on damages is a bandaid, akin to a useless law saying “thou shalt not have a verdict that looks silly”. Reform has to be at the beginning ang through the entire process with unwaivable cash consequences for delay, obfuscation, failure to admit the obvious, gamesmanship and the failure to get to the point.
Because the plaintiffs’ bar can bring BS claims with little consequence and because the insurance companies can deploy expensive delaying tactics without penalty we (the public) get an inflated bill for our civil law safety net.
In response to Aantibathos, as a Plaintiff’s attorney I agree with your statement. I welcome the opportunity to hold the insurance industry accountable for their delays and “frivilous defenses” to claims which in my experience exceed “frivilous lawsuits” by a factor of 10 to 1. Conversly, if an attorney knowingly files a frivilous claim or lawsuit and it is determined to be so, then the attorney should face significant economic consequences as well (suspension of right to practice etc). Unfortunately, such a change will not come to pass because the insurance industry, as a whole, tremendously enjoys the current system. For all the railing about how much money the trial bar spends to influence legislation, the 800 pound gorilla of the economic pie is the insurance industry which can outspend trial attorneys 100 to 1.
The only crisis that exists is insurance carriers not paying on claims across the board. 80% of all litigation is because of that fact. Even with that being said ask all of the house counsel of Allstate, Farmers and 21st Century who were just laid off here in California because of lack of work whether there is a litigation crises. If there is one, it did not hit their now empty desks. They may have a few choice words for their former masters. The tort “crisis” is a figment of Bush et.als., imagination. Business does not want anybody playing in their money sandbox and so therefore a false crisis is created much like we saw with the Iraq war to convince the uinformed that reform must take place in the world of tort. If the reform does not take place, our economic world will collapse. The sky is falling. People continue to give up their rights , be they privacy rights or tort rights because someone with a bible wrapped with the American flag says that is what they should do. Even giving up our right to a secure border trumps the right of business to have access to cheap labor. One of these days we as a country will wake up to see the harm this administration is foisting on each one of us in the name of freedom, liberty and the pursuit of unfettered profits for the business community. The insurance industry needs no help from government. Consumers do need help fighting an industry that is bloated with profits. AIG is just one of many examples. I need not go further. I know this is not flattering for the industry and I don’t expect this to be posted in your print edition.
It depends, I believe, on the adage of whose ox is being gored. Studies always say what the sponsosr wishes of them. There is some merit in the contention that present administrative policies in the Bush White House affect info. Sounds a lot like the alleged Medical Liability “crisis.” Oh yeah, how about NO FAULT being a wonderful thing for the masses.
A crock is still a crock .
Is The Economic Policy Institute a reliable, honest, disinterested organization, or is it a front for the trial lawyers?
Tillinghast is correct. Tort reform will benefit the consumer about as much as HSAs. Wise up people, the real problem lies within the fuzzy math of the reinsurers and the States not imposing high enough reserve requirements of mutual/recprical/stock companies. IT’s too diversified, this drives up rates year after year, puts the consumer more at risk for an insurer insolvency. You’ld be rich if your millionaire uncle left you a million bucks but you wouldn’t be if you had to share it with a 1000 relatives.
You’re living in a dream world if you think that the tort crisis is a made up phenomenon.
Let us distinguish between liability lines of insurance and other lines. For in the other lines, tort costs are high due to bad faith claims and others that may or may not be justified. I can’t comment on this.
However, in the liability lines, the crisis does not arise from insurers not paying in 80% of the cases as Chris Russell alleges. If an insurer doesn’t fight the majority of the liability allegations (except those that are obvious), do you realize how many lawyers and plaintiffs would come out of the woodwork? When medical malpractice plaintiffs get paid upwards of 50 million dollars in PUNITIVE damages, we have a problem. When doctors and nurses are so concerned with dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s so much with their documentation because of fear of lawsuits, we have a problem. When hospitals spend more money paying malpractice costs rather than on nurses, we have a problem
Houston, we have a problem.
In reply to LLCJ the only time that I am in a “dream world” is usually when I am asleep or ‘working.” In point of fact there is no liability crisis. There is a crisis with insurance management and ethics if you believe the “latest” investigations going on in NY state via their AG’s investigationb into pricing, etc. Normally claims management does not dictate the philosophy of a carrier. Claims must respond to the scenario created. You need to review stats with the Insurance Commissioners and varous Federal Agencies that publish their stuff to find out if there ‘EVER WAS’ a medical liabillity crisis. There isn’t. There is no Liability Crisis…that is just a crock.
For 5 years rates have gone up across the board. Profits have soared. International investment in American Insurance Companies and Groups have increased dramatically. Wow, does that tell you about a crisis? Oh yeah, after 30 years in my business I can comment on Liabillity and Bad Faith…which is also liability. The present administration-speaking of Mr. Bush and his group are leading the way on one problem after another ; even when it is necessary to create problems. My opinion.
You obviously don’t see teh complete picture from an insurer point of view. Record profits are for those companies that have multiple lines of business who can use other lines to prop up the liability lines.
There is a crisis and it is well documented not just by Tillinghast Towers Perrin, but numerous other sources. hospitals are closing, doctors are moving to avoid high premium costs. 99% of medical malpractice insurers operate at a 125% loss ratio. The only way they make money is that they invest the dollars. Since it takes multiple years to settle med mal claims, this is still a viable way of doing business.
You are a claims person. Read some actuarlial studies before commenting. Then perhaps you won’t sound so politically motivated in your comments.
In response to LLCJ’s comment, it is always interesting when numbers are thrown out with no support. When was the last time (or ever) a dr got nailed for 50 million dollars in punitive damages? Details are never given b/c the information is based on fabrication in order to incite the public. The same old lies get told over and over again until people believe them. Insurance companies fight obvious claims every day. Once again ask all of the defense house counsel who were just let go here in California if there are too many claims. Don’t believe me, call and find out yourself. The “frivilous” lawsuit cry is such a crock since no atty that works on contingency would take such a claim since the liklihood of making money from it is nil. If carriers barely ever pay fair value on legitiamte claims, why would they ever pay any money on a frivilous claim? Again, if the lie is said long enough and loud enough the unsuspecting public begins to believe it. With the carriers having billions at their disposal, they can afford to spread the lies to their benefit.
These are 2002 statistics obtained from a Greater New York Hospital Association Med Malpractice Insurance Costs and Coverage report published in January 2005.. These statistics were taken from the independent verdictsearch.com:
Top 10 malpractice verdicts of 2002:
1. 94.8 Million (NY)
2. 90.9 Million (NY)
3. 80 Million (NY)
4. 78.5 Million (FL)
5. 64 Million (NY
6. 61.7 Million (NY)
7. 59.3 Million (CA)
8. 56.1 Million (NY)
9. 43.5 Million (CA)
10. 25.9 Millino (NY)
From the same report, Malpractice companies’ loss ratios and combined ratios. Loss ratio=(Ultimate loss+Defence costs)/premium, combined ratio=(Ultimate Loss+defence Costs+U/W expenses)/Premium:
1999 91% 122%
2000 103% 129%
2001 113% 141%
2002 111% 129%
The evidence is there. The data is there. When you make assertions, make sure you have credible evidence to back yourself up, not just years of personal experience. Data is freely available.
Forget for a moment the emotive elements of Big Bad Corporations vs. Sleazoid Lawyers. The fact is, it costs a total of $2.50 to $3.00 to get $1.00 to an injured claimant. The system/process sucks up a ridiculous share of the common funds to cover injury. And for all we are made to spend on this expensive fact-finding, the objective, substantive quality of the outcomes (think Bendectin, Breast implants, PCBs, perinatally-caused CP) is very poor. We pay a lot and we get a slowly generated often stupid verdicts.
Caps on damages is a bandaid, akin to a useless law saying “thou shalt not have a verdict that looks silly”. Reform has to be at the beginning ang through the entire process with unwaivable cash consequences for delay, obfuscation, failure to admit the obvious, gamesmanship and the failure to get to the point.
Because the plaintiffs’ bar can bring BS claims with little consequence and because the insurance companies can deploy expensive delaying tactics without penalty we (the public) get an inflated bill for our civil law safety net.
In response to Aantibathos, as a Plaintiff’s attorney I agree with your statement. I welcome the opportunity to hold the insurance industry accountable for their delays and “frivilous defenses” to claims which in my experience exceed “frivilous lawsuits” by a factor of 10 to 1. Conversly, if an attorney knowingly files a frivilous claim or lawsuit and it is determined to be so, then the attorney should face significant economic consequences as well (suspension of right to practice etc). Unfortunately, such a change will not come to pass because the insurance industry, as a whole, tremendously enjoys the current system. For all the railing about how much money the trial bar spends to influence legislation, the 800 pound gorilla of the economic pie is the insurance industry which can outspend trial attorneys 100 to 1.