- 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 5/9/19 at 7:48 am to boosiebadazz
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:48 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
I’m deep in trial prep for one that starts Monday
I know what I'm doing next week
0
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:50 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
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
I've dealt with the good, the bad, and the ugly. I've been in a position where I had insurance companies that refused to do the right thing and had to get representation to get things moving. It's ridiculous, and lazy. Their is a LA Dept. of Insurance that you can report them to and get some accountability.
My career has revolved around watching people figure out the system, and have minimal, if any injuries, and build up medicals to receive a settlement that far exceeds what their TRUE injuries deserved, egged on by an attorney. And when they realize they can do that, in lieu of working, it becomes a way of life.
There's filth on both sides. And good on both. You happen to be one of the good guys. Good luck on your trial.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:54 am to DevilDagNS
quote:
Then the health insurer should become a compulsory party to the settlement and reimbursed fully out of the settlement proceeds.
LOl. When don't they get paid?
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:57 am to oreeg
You idiots have no idea what a disaster that bill would have been. Utter disaster.
There are ways to do reform right, this was simply to get votes.
There are ways to do reform right, this was simply to get votes.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:58 am to Mathias
quote:quote:
As an aside, LA supremes today ruled that when worker's comp pays meds in a third-party tort suit, plaintiff can only recover what was paid pursuant to the comp fee schedule
What case are you referring to if you don’t mind?
Simmons v Cornerstone Investments, LLC
Posted on 5/9/19 at 7:58 am to SlowFlowPro
I was at my old job, Don’s Car Wash, yesterday. You should treated me to lunch at Sonic
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:02 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
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 don't disagree with any of this.
True reform will only come when we can figure out a way to ferret out the fraudulent claims. And I'm not sure anyone has a solution for that. The thing is, most claims don't begin fraudulent. There are real people with real damages. The problem is, at some point in the process, when they see that pursuing treatment (even when it's completely unnecessary) is the means to a bigger settlement and more money in their pocket, they go down that road.
And there's financial incentive for doctors to treat them unnecessarily, and attorneys to push them to continue the unnecessary treatment.
I think assessing costs against the plaintiff side when they lose at trial FOR THIS REASON, is a start. However, it's not foolproof. I don't think a plaintiff should be punished when they have a legit case, and lose simply on the issue of liability, or something along those lines. That's different than fraud. But how do you identify that gray area?
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:06 am to boosiebadazz
I’m trial lawyer friendly.
I frequently attempt to cause crowding drivers to rearend my POS truck.
If they got a commercial policy, we’re getting paid.
I frequently attempt to cause crowding drivers to rearend my POS truck.
If they got a commercial policy, we’re getting paid.
This post was edited on 5/9/19 at 8:08 am
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:11 am to Mr Clean
You have to tell me ahead of time
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:21 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
Last one from me and not directly to you, Festus, but to the thread as a whole... If you want to read an opinion that is opposite what LABI has put forth, this is a decent breakdown:
LINK
I actually read it, and it's a lot of information to digest.
I will state this, while that publication tries to present itself as unbiased (Non profit journalism for LA), this is how the Advocate described Bayou Brief:
quote:
Bayou Brief, meanwhile, has become popular among a more liberal audience and has been spread by Edwards and his supporters. It has been promoted as "progressively-minded."
quote:
Financial supporters of Bayou Brief and Watchdog, operated as nonprofits, can be difficult to track.
White operates Bayou Brief as a 501(c)4 currently, which means that its donors don't have to be disclosed. White said it gives his supporters privacy.
"I am seen as a liberal, but it shouldn't be politicized," he said. "The reason people are donating is to promote quality journalism.
"They're doing this because they believe in the work they are doing and not to promote themselves," he added.
LINK
Like everyone else, I guess, I think that this publication has a biased slant, but that's just my opinion.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:23 am to oreeg
They're all up for re-election this year. Send a message.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:26 am to Chad504boy
quote:
HB 372 reforms several tort laws which will improve the automobile insurance market.
1) Reduces the jury trial threshold from $50,000 to $5,000
2) Repeals the direct action statute
3) Requires medical expense transparency when several insurance coverages apply
4) Extends prescription from one year to two years
5) Requires LDI to review auto experience for three years and pass savings to consumers
I’d like to submit an addendum to this statute
6) Any vehicle involved in a crash without proper insurance shall be immediately impounded. The vehicle shall not be released until the owner pays to repair any damage they are responsible for causing plus fines.
Ownership is forfeited after 90 days and any sale proceeds immediately forwarded to damaged party.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:27 am to SlowFlowPro
Have there been any attempts to quantify how much these bill would save consumers? Or would that give the insurers shite when rates barely come down
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:28 am to oreeg
They got a lot of lawyer friends
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:28 am to Festus
quote:
The problem is, at some point in the process, when they see that pursuing treatment (even when it's completely unnecessary) is the means to a bigger settlement and more money in their pocket, they go down that road.
Or the insurance company tells them that their body shops labor rate of 55 instead of 50 is too high and they are willing to be sued over it. Or that recycled part on a 4 month old car is appropriate instead of OEM.
quote:
I think assessing costs against the plaintiff side when they lose at trial FOR THIS REASON, is a start.
But not the defendant? I'm game all day. I do not mess with anything that isn't 90/100% some other parties fault.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:29 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
There are ways to do reform right, this was simply to get votes.
Exactly. It's all pandering. JBE is vetoing anything that makes it out, but nothing is making it out.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:32 am to rmc
quote:
Or the insurance company tells them that their body shops labor rate of 55 instead of 50 is too high and they are willing to be sued over it. Or that recycled part on a 4 month old car is appropriate instead of OEM.
I agree that this happens, and if you read my earlier post, I believe that plaintiff attorneys perform a valuable service in righting these wrongs brought on by shady insurance companies. I've had to use them myself, and appreciate their work.
quote:
But not the defendant? I'm game all day. I do not mess with anything that isn't 90/100% some other parties fault.
Yes, for the defendant as well. I'm pretty sure it's already common for defendants to be assessed costs. No so much plaintiffs.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:43 am to rmc
JBE would likely line item everything except for the 2 year prescriptive period
Posted on 5/9/19 at 8:50 am to oreeg
None of it really matters anyway. In 10 years or so, thanks to self driving vehicles and auto braking, lane keep etc., there 'll be damn few accidents to sue over any rate.
And the major insurers are shitting themselves over it too. Their cash cow is gonna shrivel up. Plaintiff attorneys will crater and so will the defense bar.
Get it while you can, and start boning up on family law.
And the major insurers are shitting themselves over it too. Their cash cow is gonna shrivel up. Plaintiff attorneys will crater and so will the defense bar.
Get it while you can, and start boning up on family law.
This post was edited on 5/9/19 at 9:14 am
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News