I KNEW when Dickie Scruggs went after the insurance companies that there would be HELL to pay for those crooks.
Lawyer: Whistleblower Helping Build Case Against Insurer In Hurricane Katrina Lawsuit
A high-profile litigator said Thursday that a whistleblower is helping him build a case against insurers who denied thousands of claims from policyholders whose homes were destroyed in Hurricane Katrina.
Richard "Dickie'' Scruggs, who helped secure a multibillion dollar settlement against tobacco companies in the 1990s, told The Associated Press the whistleblower gave him copies of internal reports prepared by engineers hired by an insurance company to inspect storm-damaged homes.
He did not identify the whistleblower, or identify the person's employer. The reports indicate the company pressured engineers to change conclusions so claims could be denied, Scruggs said.
Engineers who "gave reports that the company didn't like were pressured to change their report on penalty of not having their bill paid and being terminated from lucrative business by the company,'' Scruggs said.
Working with a legal team, Scruggs is representing more than 4,000 policyholders whose homes were damaged by Katrina. His clients include his brother-in-law, U.S. Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., whose Pascagoula home was demolished by the Aug. 29 hurricane.
Also taking legal action is Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, who is suing insurance companies for refusing to cover damage from Katrina's storm surge.
Robert Hartwig, chief economist for the Insurance Information Institute, said Scruggs' allegations do not "appropriately or fairly characterize'' the industry's handling of claims in Mississippi. The state's top property insurers said this week that they have settled between 82 percent and 96 percent of policyholders' claims.
"It's unfortunate that Mr. Scruggs is seeking to portray companies as engaging in some kind of systematic deception of policyholders,'' Hartwig said.
Scruggs said it will probably take two or three months for details of the informant's cooperation to become public. A second whistleblower is also just coming forward, he said.
Scruggs, a Mississippi-based lawyer, is one of the nation's most renowned litigators. A whistleblower also figured prominently in his fight against tobacco companies, which was portrayed in the 1999 movie "The Insider,'' starring Al Pacino and Russell Crowe.
(Copyright 2006 by The Associated)
http://www.wlox.com/Global/story.asp?S=4648257
Don't Mess With Mississippi!
Moderator: S2k Moderators
Don't Mess With Mississippi!
0 likes
-
beachbum_al
- Category 5
- Posts: 2163
- Age: 54
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:23 pm
- Location: South Alabama Coast
- Contact:
-
Tstormwatcher
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 3086
- Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:31 pm
- Location: New Bern, NC
Tstormwatcher wrote:I have heard that insurance companies are denieing claims by saying that the houses were destroyed by flooding not by winds. If the com. can say that there was no wind damage, just water then the claim is denied. Bunch of crooks they are.
True! Which is why they should both top each other out and pay claims.
0 likes
/099.gif)
The main thrust of the law suit is to try and change the wordings (very clear wordings) on the policies, suggesting that tidal surge is not part of flooding. The insurers and NFIP settled this issue years ago, and even if a local judge (needing re-election) sides with the lawyer, this issue will not be won in appeals courts. Many who are suing did not buy flood insurance. The other issue is trying to prove wind damage occured before the house washed away. Most insurers (I have handled claims for over 30 years and work as an independant), have paid wind damage where is can be determined. If the story about a whistle blower is true and at least one company is playing with reports from experts (an engineer is someone you hire to find a reason to support your opinion), then they will deserve everything that happens to them. Law suits continue out of the Northridge earthquake on the same issue, targeting a company that is good and handy. Destroying the insurance industry is short sighted (but very profitable for the lawyers). Here in NOLA millions of dollars are being paid to lawyers and public adjusters, to solve problems that can mostly (but not all problems) be corrected by requesting a re-inspection.
0 likes
No stormcrow it is NOT clear wording. First of all, a flood is what happened in the levee breach. You are protected under your insurance policy from hurricanes. This surge occurred due to the hurricane and not from flooding. I hope Dickie Scruggs exposes the insurance industry for the crooks they are.
Do you also know (since you are an expert) that Allstate and other insurance companies claimed they suffered losses due to claims paid from 9/11? Did you know that any "act of terrorism" is excluded from policies? Check it out. Point is Allstate lost their butts in the stock market pure and simple due to 9/11. Period! And they are doing the same darn thing yet again!
Do you also know (since you are an expert) that Allstate and other insurance companies claimed they suffered losses due to claims paid from 9/11? Did you know that any "act of terrorism" is excluded from policies? Check it out. Point is Allstate lost their butts in the stock market pure and simple due to 9/11. Period! And they are doing the same darn thing yet again!
0 likes
It may surprise you but I do know how insurers can fail to provide the service they contract for. It is amazing the ways they can screw up. But it is mostly the foibles of a local manager, it is rare for it to be corporate policy.
Read this exclusion.
c. Water Damage, meaning:
(1) Flood, surface water, waves, tidal water, overflow of a body of water, or spray from any of these, whether or not driven by wind;
When NFIP was founded, policies were writen with a clear understanding of what was to go where. And rates were charged accordingly. This is the first year where the industly is really going to lose money. If the law suit succeeds, then no one on the coast will be able to buy insurance, outside of a government plan.
The industry owes you a fair settlement for your damage. It doen't not owe you cash over and above your damages. It is not a maintainence policy. They do not owe to replace your door frame that has been rotted for 10 years.
If you have your claim handled by an experience independant adjuster working on a pay scale that increases with the size of your claim, you should be able to receive a fair settlement. Now another shock. Except in Florida you are not owed replacement cost (new for old) until you get the work done. Indeed before the middle 70's there was no such thing as replacement cost.
I have heard so many lies from the legal comuunity on the radio and tv ads here. But when the dust settles, we know they will make money. And they really don't care if there are no baby doctors, medications or insurance comanies. If they run out of these they'll just sue each other.
Read this exclusion.
c. Water Damage, meaning:
(1) Flood, surface water, waves, tidal water, overflow of a body of water, or spray from any of these, whether or not driven by wind;
When NFIP was founded, policies were writen with a clear understanding of what was to go where. And rates were charged accordingly. This is the first year where the industly is really going to lose money. If the law suit succeeds, then no one on the coast will be able to buy insurance, outside of a government plan.
The industry owes you a fair settlement for your damage. It doen't not owe you cash over and above your damages. It is not a maintainence policy. They do not owe to replace your door frame that has been rotted for 10 years.
If you have your claim handled by an experience independant adjuster working on a pay scale that increases with the size of your claim, you should be able to receive a fair settlement. Now another shock. Except in Florida you are not owed replacement cost (new for old) until you get the work done. Indeed before the middle 70's there was no such thing as replacement cost.
I have heard so many lies from the legal comuunity on the radio and tv ads here. But when the dust settles, we know they will make money. And they really don't care if there are no baby doctors, medications or insurance comanies. If they run out of these they'll just sue each other.
Last edited by stormcrow on Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
0 likes
-
Camille_2_Katrina
Lindaloo wrote:No stormcrow it is NOT clear wording. First of all, a flood is what happened in the levee breach. You are protected under your insurance policy from hurricanes. This surge occurred due to the hurricane and not from flooding. I hope Dickie Scruggs exposes the insurance industry for the crooks they are.
Do you also know (since you are an expert) that Allstate and other insurance companies claimed they suffered losses due to claims paid from 9/11? Did you know that any "act of terrorism" is excluded from policies? Check it out. Point is Allstate lost their butts in the stock market pure and simple due to 9/11. Period! And they are doing the same darn thing yet again!
it is VERY clear wording... Dickie is trying to CHANGE the wording.
the companies are in fact on solid legal ground... it doesn't seem
fair... but it is. They are ver carefull about the pricing of the products.
the fact is some policy holders will get much more than they deserve...
and some will get much less than they want. There will be a few mistakes.
But they will be few...
0 likes
-
Camille_2_Katrina
Camille_2_Katrina wrote:Lindaloo wrote:No stormcrow it is NOT clear wording. First of all, a flood is what happened in the levee breach. You are protected under your insurance policy from hurricanes. This surge occurred due to the hurricane and not from flooding. I hope Dickie Scruggs exposes the insurance industry for the crooks they are.
Do you also know (since you are an expert) that Allstate and other insurance companies claimed they suffered losses due to claims paid from 9/11? Did you know that any "act of terrorism" is excluded from policies? Check it out. Point is Allstate lost their butts in the stock market pure and simple due to 9/11. Period! And they are doing the same darn thing yet again!
it is VERY clear wording... Dickie is trying to CHANGE the wording.
the companies are in fact on solid legal ground... it doesn't seem
fair... but it is. They are ver carefull about the pricing of the products.
the fact is some policy holders will get much more than they deserve...
and some will get much less than they want. There will be a few mistakes.
But they will be few...
Okay. lol.
0 likes
This is an interesting challenge, the house is destryed by surge, was it wind damaged first. If you could in a similar house of similar age (especially the roofing) in as close a location to where your house was; then show from the reports when the peak winds were and when the surge reached your street; you might catch the insurers atention. I have assumed the peak winds preceeded the surge. Just remember the the total claim under both wind and flood combined, can't exceed the replacement cost of the structure less deductibles.
0 likes
-
Camille_2_Katrina
-
Camille_2_Katrina
Bluefrog wrote:yep.....
then you were covered under the flood policy...
surge took the whole structure... y'all had a better
policy than most did on the beach... much better than
the one the condos had durring georges and emily... 3 times
better.
you did better than most
Last edited by Camille_2_Katrina on Tue Mar 21, 2006 12:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
0 likes
Return to “Hurricane Recovery and Aftermath”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests