Those who oppose this legislation do so no because it will promote frivolous law suits-it won\’t. Rather, they oppose this measure because they are guilty of outrageously abusing the trust and the rights of their own customers.
How many of us would keep a health insurance company if that company required a \”independent\” medical exam before treating our cancer?
How many of us would abide such a company\’s declaration that our chemotherapy expenses were unreasonable or unrelated to our disease.
And what might we do if we learned that all of these impediments to our receiving the benefit of our bargain were interposed solely in bad faith for the simple reason that the insurance company wanted greater profits?
The simple fact is that auto insurance carriers engage in this kind of behavior every day. They happily collect premiums for years on end only to arbitrarily deny claims when they arise.
The consequences of this legislation may mean a quantitative increase of legitimate lawsuits. However, an insurance company\’s refusal to live up to its contractual responsibilities is no frivolous matter.
\’The simple fact is that auto insurance carriers engage in this kind of behavior every day. They happily collect premiums for years on end only to arbitrarily deny claims when they arise.\’
That is an outright lie, and negates any other point you might have. I have been in the insurance industry as an agent 15 years and have no idea of what you are referring to. You obviously are an attorney, and a damn dumb one at that.
There is NOTHING arbitrary about the auto insurance conract. It represents years of evolution and has been tested at every legal level in our country.
Craig S. Andersen. Firm:, Morse & Bratt. Address:, Sixth Floor Main Place 1111 Main Street Vancouver, WA 98660. Phone:, (360) 699-4780. Fax:, (360) 699-4839 …
I am sick of hearing the insurance companies whine about \”frivolous lawsuits.\” As far as I know, the courts and their rules make more than adequate provision for preventing all but the occasional truly \”frivolous\” lawsuits from ever getting into court. The insurance industry continues this whine as a way to justify continually increasing their already outrageous premiums. I am thankful that we currently have in Washington a pretty good insurance commissioner who doesn\’t buy this stuff. The insurance industry has pretty much unlimited resources to fight paying any claim, and appear to use those resources with a great degree of success on almost all occasions. This forces insureds who decide to insist on getting the coverage that they paid for to engage legal representation to enforce their rights under their contracts. I gag every time I see one of those self-laudatory insurance company ads on TV where they talk about how they will be there for an insured that\’s incurred a loss. They\’ll be there only if forced to be in the vast majority of cases. If there were not egregious abuses, regulation would not be necessary. The answer is NOT less regulation, it is less abuse by the insurance industry. And it could start by cutting executives\’ obscene rates of compensation. With those savings it would have plenty of $$ and would not \”need\” to raise premiums–not that it needs to now.
\”SB 5726 is one of the most harmful measures included in a massive, unprecedented personal injury lawyer agenda moving through the Washington Legislature. Plaintiff\’s attorneys paid $1.5 million in political contributions to candidates here over the last two years, and now they are demanding a return on their investment,\” said Kenton Brine, PCI Northwest regional manager.
Never a word from those lizards about how insurance really works in Washington, along with most other states. Do they even know who sets auto insurance rates in Washington? (the commissioner P. Simon is bragging up). Continually raising outrageous premiums? Most of my clients have seen their premiums go down with discounts and competition. And we are not talking about less regulation. Are you kidding, P and Simon? This bill adds regulation to an otherwise perfectly working model. Lastly, an attorney complaining about obscene rates of compensation? Lets just take the attorney comments on this web page and work them into a comedy routine. One would hardly need to do ANY editing to produce huge merriment in an audience, even one made up of litigators. Imagine,
an attorney who wants more laws. Gee, never heard that one (NOT).
Those who oppose this legislation do so no because it will promote frivolous law suits-it won\’t. Rather, they oppose this measure because they are guilty of outrageously abusing the trust and the rights of their own customers.
How many of us would keep a health insurance company if that company required a \”independent\” medical exam before treating our cancer?
How many of us would abide such a company\’s declaration that our chemotherapy expenses were unreasonable or unrelated to our disease.
And what might we do if we learned that all of these impediments to our receiving the benefit of our bargain were interposed solely in bad faith for the simple reason that the insurance company wanted greater profits?
The simple fact is that auto insurance carriers engage in this kind of behavior every day. They happily collect premiums for years on end only to arbitrarily deny claims when they arise.
The consequences of this legislation may mean a quantitative increase of legitimate lawsuits. However, an insurance company\’s refusal to live up to its contractual responsibilities is no frivolous matter.
You wrote:
\’The simple fact is that auto insurance carriers engage in this kind of behavior every day. They happily collect premiums for years on end only to arbitrarily deny claims when they arise.\’
That is an outright lie, and negates any other point you might have. I have been in the insurance industry as an agent 15 years and have no idea of what you are referring to. You obviously are an attorney, and a damn dumb one at that.
There is NOTHING arbitrary about the auto insurance conract. It represents years of evolution and has been tested at every legal level in our country.
Thought so….
Craig S. Andersen. Firm:, Morse & Bratt. Address:, Sixth Floor Main Place 1111 Main Street Vancouver, WA 98660. Phone:, (360) 699-4780. Fax:, (360) 699-4839 …
I am sick of hearing the insurance companies whine about \”frivolous lawsuits.\” As far as I know, the courts and their rules make more than adequate provision for preventing all but the occasional truly \”frivolous\” lawsuits from ever getting into court. The insurance industry continues this whine as a way to justify continually increasing their already outrageous premiums. I am thankful that we currently have in Washington a pretty good insurance commissioner who doesn\’t buy this stuff. The insurance industry has pretty much unlimited resources to fight paying any claim, and appear to use those resources with a great degree of success on almost all occasions. This forces insureds who decide to insist on getting the coverage that they paid for to engage legal representation to enforce their rights under their contracts. I gag every time I see one of those self-laudatory insurance company ads on TV where they talk about how they will be there for an insured that\’s incurred a loss. They\’ll be there only if forced to be in the vast majority of cases. If there were not egregious abuses, regulation would not be necessary. The answer is NOT less regulation, it is less abuse by the insurance industry. And it could start by cutting executives\’ obscene rates of compensation. With those savings it would have plenty of $$ and would not \”need\” to raise premiums–not that it needs to now.
in time to demand their moneys worth…
\”SB 5726 is one of the most harmful measures included in a massive, unprecedented personal injury lawyer agenda moving through the Washington Legislature. Plaintiff\’s attorneys paid $1.5 million in political contributions to candidates here over the last two years, and now they are demanding a return on their investment,\” said Kenton Brine, PCI Northwest regional manager.
Never a word from those lizards about how insurance really works in Washington, along with most other states. Do they even know who sets auto insurance rates in Washington? (the commissioner P. Simon is bragging up). Continually raising outrageous premiums? Most of my clients have seen their premiums go down with discounts and competition. And we are not talking about less regulation. Are you kidding, P and Simon? This bill adds regulation to an otherwise perfectly working model. Lastly, an attorney complaining about obscene rates of compensation? Lets just take the attorney comments on this web page and work them into a comedy routine. One would hardly need to do ANY editing to produce huge merriment in an audience, even one made up of litigators. Imagine,
an attorney who wants more laws. Gee, never heard that one (NOT).