Idaho Upset over Toyota Ads

January 3, 2008

  • January 3, 2008 at 11:21 am
    KLS says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Do people *really* commit insurance fraud based on what they see in a TV commercial? GMAB.

  • January 3, 2008 at 12:09 pm
    mikefromjersey says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I think our anti-fraud resources could be better utilized in endeavors beyond trying to get Toyota to pull these delightful commercials. It is inconceivable to think that an individual considering insurance fraud is waffling, on the brink of moving forward with his/her plan, seeing this commercial and finally just saying…..”Well, if it worked for that guy in the commercial it should work for me!!” The greater likelihood would be for Toyota to get their commercial ideas from the jackasses who attempt that type of fraud in real life….like the guy in PA who threw his mustang off a shallow cliff.

    Give Toyota a break!! Thank God the commercials aren’t boring!!

  • January 3, 2008 at 12:48 pm
    KEC says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    As a member of the “short bus” investigator guild, I too have to chime in and echo prior sentiment. Have some humour. Not to mention, thanks for the pointers – those who are really that stupid, do keep us employed !

  • January 3, 2008 at 12:48 pm
    Underwriter says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It’s not fraud unless they turn in a claim! Do the ads show the car owner filing a claim? Nope!

    Our society has gone off the edge – health care equals health insurance, right? Wrong. You can get health care without health insurance, you just gotta pay for it.

    If I want to trash my car or burn my house down it’s not insurance fraud unless I turn in a claim.

  • January 3, 2008 at 12:51 pm
    SW says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I have to admit that the first time I saw those ads I thought of 10 or so fraud claims I’ve handled in my past that we suspected had that same theme. I don’t think the objection is out of line. I was surprised at Toyota. They have better advertising moxie than that.

  • January 3, 2008 at 12:55 pm
    Realist says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I say pull them.

  • January 3, 2008 at 12:55 pm
    Potato Head says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    There’s nothing happening in Idaho (except Boise State losing in the Hawaii Bowl), so I think it’s just a way of drawing attention to their state, and letting us all know they have a DOI, etc.

  • January 3, 2008 at 12:56 pm
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Someone got the idea from somewhere.

    http://www.claimsjournal.com/news/east/2007/12/31/86007.htm

  • January 3, 2008 at 12:58 pm
    Program Mgr says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The TV ad doesn’t make them commit fraud, it enables their deductive reasoning and pure instinct takes over! They can’t help it. Toyota should start an awareness program and give the potential arsonist a new Toyota Tundra!

  • January 3, 2008 at 1:18 am
    Mr. Obvious says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I have a car that needs to be taken out to the pasture and shot. However, thanks to Toyota I know now that all I need to do get a new Toyota truck is:
    1) Get a job in a steel mill running a crane.
    2) Find a way to get my car parked inside the mill right next to where the big-rigs are loaded up.
    3) Conveniently run the crane 30 feet past the big rig despite the warnings of every worker on the floor.
    4) Drop the steel I-beam on my car.
    5) Sit back and smile

    A new Toyota will obviously then be delivered to my workplace so that I can get home.

    Oops, forgot about reality:
    6) Claims adjuster looks at the damage and finds out my occupation is crane operator.
    7) Jail time.

  • January 3, 2008 at 1:20 am
    Dread says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    There has always been a segment of our population know as idiots who have attempted to destroy their crap vehicles for new ones or to escape payments. The Toyota commercial is nothing new and won’t have any impact on the idiot population. That’s why we have SIU’s.

  • January 3, 2008 at 2:45 am
    KOKOMOJOE says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    They poke fun at insurance fraud. Maybe next they will show Dad & Mom leaving a case of beer on ice in the front seat of the 2 year old Tundra. Then handing the keys to 16 year old Billy and telling him to take the Tundra to the lake for a good time with his classmates. Maybe that would offend some of you who think the insurance fraud connection is a stretch. These ads make me think Toyota SUCKS and not much else!

  • January 3, 2008 at 3:12 am
    Hank says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Those ads are VERY believable and all the comments about it encouraging insurance fraud are right on point. I also drink a certain type of beer to get good looking friends. I bought that big rubber band for $19.99 to trim my thunder thighs. And I feel very sorry for that guy who has to work with monkeys! Boy, what fool he must be to have accepted that job!!!

  • January 3, 2008 at 3:20 am
    Funny says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Funny, I just read that Toyota took the number two slot for car sales in America. Is it possible that the only people concerned about these commercials are insurance adjusters. If so Toyota may be laughing all the way to the bank. No matter what you do in today’s society you will offend someone!

  • January 3, 2008 at 3:37 am
    Adirondacker says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You realize we – insurance people – are the only people on the planet viewing (and talking about) these ads as a criminal action. Honestly this discussion, and the action of the Idaho DOI for that matter, just makes me smile. Apparently I’m not the only one who needs a vacation from this business…

  • January 3, 2008 at 5:36 am
    ZOO KEEPER says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    THE TIMING OF THIS FRAUD INCIDENT COINSIDES WITH TOYOTA’S CURRENT ADVERTISEMENT PERFECTLY

    Pa. Man Accused of Pushing Car off Mountain to Make Theft Claim
    December 31, 2007

    A Pennsylvania man pushed his Ford Mustang down a mountain as part of a scheme to claim it was stolen, authorities said.

    Richard Way Jr., 28, pushed the car down an embankment along Wopsy Mountain in Blair County last year, then reported it had been stolen from the parking lot of a hot dog restaurant, the Pennsylvania attorney general’s office said.

    Way, of Claysburg, was arraigned last week on charges of filing false police reports, theft and insurance fraud.

    A cousin, Travis Knox, told police he saw Way remove stereo equipment from the Mustang and was asked to help push the car off a cliff, according to the arrest affidavit. Knox said he refused to help, and told investigators that Way confessed the crime to him a few days later.

    Reached at his home, Way declined comment and said a lawyer would speak on his behalf later.

    Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • January 4, 2008 at 9:25 am
    dragonbuilder says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What about the other idiots that claim that the records that they heard or the tv programs caused them to commit violence. Some (?) attorneys will try to use this as a defense on the part of the insured that causes fraud? Some try it and some get away with it. We still need to blame the idiots that commit the crime.

  • January 4, 2008 at 9:34 am
    DWT says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What have we come to? I have seen the ads and have taken them for what they were intended, a method to show JQ Public that people like their Toyota’s and will dump their current rides to justify buying a new Toyota.

    I feel sorry for this county if we have to have government making sure that only good pure thoughts and actions are shown in ads.

  • January 4, 2008 at 11:14 am
    Church Lady says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    How about a couple comes home from a party. Leroy was drunk again and hitting on all the good looking gals making a real pig of himself, while embarrassing Lulubell, his wife. Big fat Lulubell had to much to drink also. Lulubell comes in and sees that new $500,000.00 term policy finally arrived in the mail. Lulubell waits till Leroy passes out on the bathroom floor. KABOOM! You figure out the rest. Bad taste just like Toyota. Might sell a few life policies and help get another agent to qualify for their trip.

  • January 4, 2008 at 11:26 am
    Dustin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Sometimes we in the industry take ourselves too seriously. I thought the ads were pretty funny. Guess I just have bad taste!

  • January 4, 2008 at 12:17 pm
    I'm a person too says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Hey Church Lady, I’m a drunken pig and I don’t like your tone… stop picking on drunks with bag fat wives, will ya? Why is it always about the sloppy drunk guy… you know, I’m tired of the perpetual persecution people like me face everyday of our miserable lives!

  • January 4, 2008 at 1:40 am
    Little Frog says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Hey Ima’: Maybe you could turn your lunatic rant into an ad for Decaf Coffee, or some anti-psychotic medicine. Wait! I know what; how about if General Motors hired you to drive Monster Hummers and Escalades onto different Toyota dealer lots to demonstrate how they’re smashing the competition?

  • January 7, 2008 at 7:39 am
    ORLANDO AGENT says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I rarely watch TV but caught three of the Toyota ads early last month and nearly had a stroke. For heaven’s sake, I am a Toyota owner. I wrote the Florida Department of Insurance to complain and was referred to the Attorney General. I wrote to Toyota; their basic response was: It’s a joke. I do not think it’s a funny, amusing joke even if, as some other posters have mentioned, it’s not a crime unless it’s reported as a claim. I believe it is sick for a major corporation to make the insinuation: trash your car and get a new one. A company with the resources of Toyota SURELY COULD come up with a REALLY funny commercial like my favorite Super Bowl commercial of a couple of years ago: Herding Cats. Go Idaho DOI; fie on the Florida DOI! Stamp out fraud!

  • January 7, 2008 at 11:15 am
    4morereferrals.com says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Pass the banana’s – the monkeys will be pushing their junkers off the 2 story parking structure in droves NOW .. LOL

    I just hope they are all GEICO customers! Same mindset methinks …

    Steve
    http://www.4morereferrals.com

  • January 7, 2008 at 11:35 am
    Bob from Wisconsin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I’ve seen the ads too. I don’t look at them as encouraging insurance fraud. I iamagine that all of the destroyed vehicles were fully paid for and the owners had no comp or collision on them. A person can destroy their own property ad it doesn’t constitute fraud.

  • January 7, 2008 at 12:06 pm
    Agent in PA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    If you weren’t thinking fraud why wouldn’t a person trade in the vehicle. Almost every dealer has a minimum trade. You can bet any phi beta kappa trying to pull off this stunt is going to be looking for insurance money.

  • January 7, 2008 at 2:49 am
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    “i’m a person too”, you might be the sloppiest drunk that as ever written on this page. but i like it. perhaps you should advertise for toyota aswell, we can all become womanizing drunks and eat goldfish together! woo hoo!

  • January 8, 2008 at 2:06 am
    Dustin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I will say it again, lighten up! My interpretation from this is that the new Toyota is so great, people will do anything to get their hands on it! I think it is great marketing. I seriously doubt they thought, let’s perpetuate fraud and influence idiots in America to stick it to the Insurance Industry! That is just ridiculous. I seriously doubt that Joe blow is sitting at home thinking, I can’t afford a new car, but I want one soooo badly. What can I do to get one? Oh, what will I do? (sees Toyota ad) What a great idea! Insurance fraud! Thanks, Toyota…..you’re the best. Gimme a break.

  • January 8, 2008 at 6:19 am
    The Voice of Reason says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Having insurance people defend Toyota’s latest ad that promotes destroying your vehicle for a new one is terrible!
    Some of you remind me of the time when the tobacco industry paid doctors to come out and say smoking their cigarettes helped relieve sore throats and coughs.

  • January 9, 2008 at 7:36 am
    Dustin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Voice of Reason….your argument seems flawed. We can obviously point out that smoking causes cancer. How easily can we say that this Toyota ad causes fraud? I guess comedy really is a dying artform.

  • January 9, 2008 at 8:17 am
    The Voice of Reason says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Per 9 out of 10 of the tobacco doctors cigarettes actually do not cause cancer but instead cure the common cold. Sorry but when you ask the television viewers who remember the Toyota ads the majority say it makes people think of insurance fraud. That is why the Idaho DOI has a problem with the ad.

  • January 9, 2008 at 8:21 am
    Dustin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I guess I missed the part where the guy trashed the car then called his adjuster. I really should pay more attention to these things. Also, 9 of 10 tobacco doctors says cigarettes don’t cause cancer, and 9 of 10 insurance people the ads perpetuate fraud. See a pattern here? Both people have an agenda and a certain bias here. In both situations their opinions are less valuable due to this bias.

  • January 9, 2008 at 10:03 am
    Voice of Reason says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Good Point. Touche!

  • January 9, 2008 at 4:33 am
    Shaking her head in CA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Seriously??? If someone is of the persuasion to commit fraud or any crime for that matter, they will. I am not someone that would commit fraud and guess what… I thought they were just funny ads.

    I also do not think that I am sexier when I drink DiSerrano on the rocks, I am not buying pills that my TV says can melt fat, I don’t think choosing one feminine product over another means I can skip around in white pants versus hiding in a corner, I don’t give a crap that people freaked out when the Whopper wasn’t sold in a Las Vegas location, and I personally doubt that putting 40 pounds of change in a bank teller tube will then dent the wall of the bank and rain coins on the employees.

    Maybe I am just odd.

  • January 11, 2008 at 11:04 am
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The 60 million U.S. homeowners who pay more than $50 billion a year in insurance premiums are often disappointed when they discover insurers won’t pay the full cost of rebuilding their damaged or destroyed homes. Property insurers systematically deny and reduce their policyholders’ claims, according to court records in California, Florida, Illinois, Mississippi, New Hampshire and Tennessee. The insurance companies routinely refuse to pay market prices for homes and replacement contents, they use computer programs to cut payouts, they change policy coverage with no clear explanation, they ignore or alter engineering reports, and they sometimes

  • January 11, 2008 at 11:10 am
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    BLOOMINGTON — State Farm Insurance Cos. rewarded its leader with an 82 percent pay raise after profits hit an all-time high last year.

    What will State Farm Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Ed Rust Jr. make if the company can equal or top that mark this year?

    In a brief interview with the Pantagraph this week, Rust wouldn’t offer any financial predictions for 2007, saying only that State Farm needs to evaluate earnings over a longer term than one year.

    He even called 2006 a “break-even” year, considering the multibillion-dollar losses State Farm suffered in 2001 and 2002.

  • January 11, 2008 at 11:11 am
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    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.

  • January 11, 2008 at 12:22 pm
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    one in four adults in the United States believe that it is acceptable to cheat on an insurance claim, up from 21 percent just nine years ago.( Only 1 percent will try to rip off the inurance companys.,I have studyed this for over 2 yrs. 20 to 50 percent is all of us being rip off by insurance and we have no one to help us.

  • January 11, 2008 at 12:49 pm
    Melanie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    :
    I think our anti-fraud resources could be better utilized BY TELLING THE CEO WE WILL NOT PUT UP WITH BAD FAITH FROM THIS DAY ON WE TRUST INSURANCE HAD BETTER LEARN . I,AM FOR ANTI- FRAUD RESOURCES BUT NOT JUST FOR ONESIDE AND THAT IS HOW IT WORKS RIGHT NOW. NOT SO FAIR IS IT???

  • January 11, 2008 at 3:10 am
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    just would like to uderstand the law.. In October 2006 with documents in had the SKG filed a case Mcintosh V State Farm Case No 1;-cv-01080 – Lts- RTS-RItw (S>D>Miss. Filed Oct 23,2006) This was the frist lawsuit filed . After Hurrican Katrina alleged conspiracy between State Fare and outsider engineering firms to alter or falsify engineering reportsin order to wrongfully deny State Farm policyholders benefits.. tell me want you think is this professional conduct “improper” critical terms of their contracts. IS this modern legal ethics may be to you boys but not to me. you need to rewright the Ethical rules so State Farm may stop violating the law.. If we turn are backs on this what will be next ask youself that one…



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*