re: Personal injury fraud ring is hitting the news.

quote:

---

He paid his health insurance premiums to get the discounted rates

---

Compensatory damages are supposed to make a victim whole.

If a plaintiff can recover more from a defendant that the actual damages caused, that's punitive damages.

quote:

---

I pay the health insurance premiums, why should the other, responsible person get the benefit of the bargain I made?

---

Do you get a check for the discounts/adjustments YOU get from your medical providers?

If your health insurance gets charged for 10k of medical bills for you in a given year, but because of your policy, 8k of those bills are written off, do you get an 8k check?

Then why should you get that if you incure the same medicals and get the samw cintractual discoubts just because you were in an accident?

Ahhhh...the old tort deterrance canard supporting the collateral source rule.

I am not saying the insurance company can't recover what it paid or the the plaintiff can't recover any copays or out of pocket.

But absent the accident, NO ONE recovers the write offs/adjustments.

Sorry, allowing the plaintiff to recover for damages he/she has not incurred is contrary to the concept of compensatory damages.

quote:

---

Ahhhh...the old tort deterrance canard supporting the collateral source rule.

---

Please tell me you didn't pass the bar...

quote:

---

Ahhhh...the old tort deterrance canard supporting the collateral source rule.

---

I never said anything about deterrence .

quote:

---

I am not saying the insurance company can't recover what it paid

---

They won't recover anything if the plaintiff does not make a claim on the responsible third party, but this is irrelevant to the collateral source rule.

quote:

---

But absent the accident, NO ONE recovers the write offs/adjustments.

---

Uh yeah, regardless of whether there is a liable third party, the patient recovers the benefit of the contractual adjustment.

quote:

---

All 9 parts.

---

Figures. Must be ever lowering standards.

Tell me where Athanatos said anything about deterrence?

I'll hang up and listen...

quote:

---

I'll hang up and listen...

---

quote:

---

You need to make a policy decision regarding who should get that benefit, the person who paid for it, or the tortfeasor and his insurer

---

Maybe you should read gooder

quote:

---

Still waiting for the deference part numbnutts

---

You mean deterrence?

Did he say the word? No. But it's clearly what he's intimating.

You like the policy. I don't. Thankfully, the Supreme Court has been chipping away at it.

Don't worry. I am sure the plaintiffs bar will find new and innovative ways to frick over insurance companies.

quote:

---

Uh yeah, regardless of whether there is a liable third party, the patient recovers the benefit of the contractual adjustment

---

They get a check?

quote:

---

Do you know how health insurance works?

---

Yes.

You are being disingenuous and misleading.

Does the insured get a check from either his insurance company or the medical provider for the amount of the contractual write off/ adjustment?

No, he/she does not.

Then, why should a tortfeasor or his insurer pay him/her for it? The policyholder STILL gets the "benefit" regardless, but somehow because the person is injured through the fault if another they should now get something they would NEVER get otherwise?