- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Louisiana Residents - Your Senators Standing in the Way of Lowering Your Insurance Rates
Posted on 5/8/19 at 9:28 pm to Phil A Sheo
Posted on 5/8/19 at 9:28 pm to Phil A Sheo
They really have no clue how lucky we have any damn companies writing auto insurance here. Marketplace will drive prices down long term w new competition. Minor reforms aren’t enough to bring new competition in w the shite storm of a state we have.
1
Posted on 5/8/19 at 9:32 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Same here, no way he makes it thru next election cycle. If he does, shame on us.
Posted on 5/8/19 at 10:36 pm to northLAgoomba
quote:Google it, helluva story.
What is his brother's name?
Posted on 5/8/19 at 10:40 pm to Sentrius
quote:What was funny about the blackface deal was he dressed like Tiger Woods for a church costume party or some such.
Ryan's brother, Robbie,
Funny these dudes are big in the church- and I guess that’s how Ryan got elected.
Posted on 5/8/19 at 10:44 pm to Chad504boy
This is a good thread to bookmark, as we can clearly see who all the attorneys are.
I've said this on other topics, and I'll say it here.
If 49 states do something one way, and we do it another way, it's not likely that we found a better way than everyone else. In fact, it's likely the opposite.
Our auto insurance is more expensive than liberal states. More expensive than conservative states. More expensive than rich states. More expensive than poor states. More expensive than more diverse states. More expensive than less diverse states.
All of our traffic laws and traffic stats aren't that far out of line compared to other states. No, it's a few things, and they all involve our legal system.
It's not hard to understand.
If you make the market more attractive, AND more profitable, that will bring in new providers. Those new providers, seeing how profitable this market is, will want to quickly get market share. They do that by either offering a better product, or a lower premium, than what is currently out there.
Then, the current providers see, oh shite, if I don't make some changes I'm going to lose market share, so they lower premiums in response, or offer a better product. And off you go.
Again... 49 other states do this. It seems to work.
I'm not expecting our rates to ever become the lowest. Hell, I'm not expecting them to even come down to a national average. But if we can get SOME relief... that would be huge. Like, cut the price gap between us in Texas, in half. That would be super.
I've said this on other topics, and I'll say it here.
If 49 states do something one way, and we do it another way, it's not likely that we found a better way than everyone else. In fact, it's likely the opposite.
Our auto insurance is more expensive than liberal states. More expensive than conservative states. More expensive than rich states. More expensive than poor states. More expensive than more diverse states. More expensive than less diverse states.
All of our traffic laws and traffic stats aren't that far out of line compared to other states. No, it's a few things, and they all involve our legal system.
It's not hard to understand.
If you make the market more attractive, AND more profitable, that will bring in new providers. Those new providers, seeing how profitable this market is, will want to quickly get market share. They do that by either offering a better product, or a lower premium, than what is currently out there.
Then, the current providers see, oh shite, if I don't make some changes I'm going to lose market share, so they lower premiums in response, or offer a better product. And off you go.
Again... 49 other states do this. It seems to work.
I'm not expecting our rates to ever become the lowest. Hell, I'm not expecting them to even come down to a national average. But if we can get SOME relief... that would be huge. Like, cut the price gap between us in Texas, in half. That would be super.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 4:21 am to LaBR4
State Farm has had several rate decreases lately.
Explain that in light of the drivel on this topic...
Explain that in light of the drivel on this topic...
Posted on 5/9/19 at 6:12 am to LSUFanHouston
where is the FBI in this State? did all the government corruption agents just pack up and leave?
please come back.
please come back.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 6:19 am to oreeg
Testified before that committee last year. Luneau is a huge spoke in the Bar Association wheel. Ward is pushing the new MS River Bridge. The key to getting the other’s support is convincing either one of those gentlemen.
The problem is they are the types whose minds were made up long ago. They will not allow facts or reality to bend their self generated narrative.
Luneau is by far the worst. Very willing to be bought and paid for by a special interest. Which he was last year. But Ward as chair and Luneau as Vice Chair are the real power on Jud A on the Senate side.
The problem is they are the types whose minds were made up long ago. They will not allow facts or reality to bend their self generated narrative.
Luneau is by far the worst. Very willing to be bought and paid for by a special interest. Which he was last year. But Ward as chair and Luneau as Vice Chair are the real power on Jud A on the Senate side.
This post was edited on 5/9/19 at 6:22 am
Posted on 5/9/19 at 6:40 am to oreeg
How much were rates to be reduced by this bill?
Posted on 5/9/19 at 6:46 am to oreeg
Moving back home from Houston two years ago, my State Farm rate for 3 vehicles increased by 50% and my $1mm umbrella policy by 320%. No claims no accidents in the last 20 years, no teenage drivers.
I'm not an attorney or claim to fully understand the legal issues for why LA is one of the highest cost states, but this observation troubles me: who is paying for the incessant, wide spread and costly PI lawyer advertising in our state?
I am, as State Farm indirectly includes that cost it's rate structure to me. No line item for PI lawyer advertising just the overall cost of doing business in LA. The real cost is in the auto insurance process.
Going by the ridiculous amount of PI attorney billboards and TV ads, it must be an extremely lucrative business.
Why is that the case? Are the insurance companies such wicked crooks they can't be trusted by the average consumer to fairly settle? What percentage of claims result in the threat of litigation to support this "industry?"
It's outrageous.
I'm not an attorney or claim to fully understand the legal issues for why LA is one of the highest cost states, but this observation troubles me: who is paying for the incessant, wide spread and costly PI lawyer advertising in our state?
I am, as State Farm indirectly includes that cost it's rate structure to me. No line item for PI lawyer advertising just the overall cost of doing business in LA. The real cost is in the auto insurance process.
Going by the ridiculous amount of PI attorney billboards and TV ads, it must be an extremely lucrative business.
Why is that the case? Are the insurance companies such wicked crooks they can't be trusted by the average consumer to fairly settle? What percentage of claims result in the threat of litigation to support this "industry?"
It's outrageous.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:10 am to Phil A Sheo
quote:
There are 2 very large national companies that would be here tomorrow if we ever get changes done.
Care to elaborate on what changes need to get done to accomplish this?
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:14 am to oreeg
You’re a fricking retard to think this bill aids consumers
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:16 am to Neauxla
quote:
what they are selling you is propaganda. This bill is being pushed by the insurance companies. It's not to help the normal person in any way shape or form. It's not going to lower rates. What it will do is bog down the judicial system, which is already bogged down, and cost more in tax dollars, put more stress on businesses, delay criminal and civil trials, etc.
quote:
Neauxla
Well, we've found our first liberal trial attorney. How many of these guys do you hunt with?
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:17 am to GFunk
quote:
Luneau is by far the worst. Very willing to be bought and paid for by a special interest. Which he was last year. But Ward as chair and Luneau as Vice Chair are the real power on Jud A on the Senate side.
Upvote.
This guy truly understands what's going on.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:18 am to oreeg
I just had to renew auto.
Dropped nearly 10% in cost this time, and I have two DWI arrests on my record.
Dropped nearly 10% in cost this time, and I have two DWI arrests on my record.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:25 am to Carnifex
Then the health insurer should become a compulsory party to the settlement and reimbursed fully out of the settlement proceeds. If you want to submit full bills as proof of damages, then the health insurer should be on the settlement check by statute.
The good news is that attorney negotiated discounts are not considered collateral source, and the supreme court just held that worker's comp payments are not either. So progress is being made.
The good news is that attorney negotiated discounts are not considered collateral source, and the supreme court just held that worker's comp payments are not either. So progress is being made.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:27 am to Mr Breeze
quote:
Moving back home from Houston two years ago, my State Farm rate for 3 vehicles increased by 50% and my $1mm umbrella policy by 320%. No claims no accidents in the last 20 years, no teenage drivers.
Where did you move to? I moved from Katy, TX to Lafayette in 2010 and my rates dropped
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:41 am to DevilDagNS
quote:
Then the health insurer should become a compulsory party to the settlement and reimbursed fully out of the settlement proceeds. If you want to submit full bills as proof of damages, then the health insurer should be on the settlement check by statute.
The health insurer has the right to subrogate. It's their choice. If you place them on the check by statute, you will hold up the process for the receiver of damages, and the entire settlement process, hurting everyone. It can take weeks or months for them to sign and return the back of the check. Most have a minimum limit before they decide to get involved and subrogate.
There's an excessive amount of extremely dishonest plaintiff's and plaintiff attorneys in LA. At a higher rate than probably every other state. But, that being said, there are a lot of good, honest people that truly have damages and fly by night insurance companies that do a terrible job of making them whole. They have to engage attorneys, and thankfully, there are some really good ones.
Full bills are the damages. If the health insurer is too lazy to pursue, or it's not fiscally advantageous for them to do so, that's on them. Don't punish all of the other parties.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:42 am to Festus
I’m deep in trial prep for one that starts Monday so I can’t really participate in this thread fully, but I trust you’ll give a fair and honest assessment of both sides, Uncle Fes 
my man
quote:
The health insurer has the right to subrogate. It's their choice. If you place them on the check by statute, you will hold up the process for the receiver of damages, and the entire settlement process, hurting everyone. It can take weeks or months for them to sign and return the back of the check. Most have a minimum limit before they decide to get involved and subrogate.
There's an excessive amount of extremely dishonest plaintiff's and plaintiff attorneys in LA. At a higher rate than probably every other state. But, that being said, there are a lot of good, honest people that truly have damages and fly by night insurance companies that do a terrible job of making them whole. They have to engage attorneys, and thankfully, there are some really good ones.
Full bills are the damages. If the health insurer is too lazy to pursue, or it's not fiscally advantageous for them to do so, that's on them. Don't punish all of the other parties.
my man This post was edited on 5/9/19 at 7:45 am
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:48 am to Festus
yeah i can see the arguments about collateral source, but, it's then punishing the people who get insurance and rewarding those who don't. that sounds like silly policy
i think the jury threshold should be reduced to the typical city court limit ($25k). reducing that threshold to $5k won't do much when the small claims will all just be filed in city courts.
i like direct action. i don't get the argument for removing it
2 year prescriptive period would almost assuredly reduce litigation costs. i doubt any PI attorneys would be against this change, either
i think the jury threshold should be reduced to the typical city court limit ($25k). reducing that threshold to $5k won't do much when the small claims will all just be filed in city courts.
i like direct action. i don't get the argument for removing it
2 year prescriptive period would almost assuredly reduce litigation costs. i doubt any PI attorneys would be against this change, either
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News