- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Accident lawyers are a big cause of higher auto insurance rates...
Posted on 8/31/23 at 9:57 am to NCIS_76
Posted on 8/31/23 at 9:57 am to NCIS_76
I've never met one who wasn't a greedy hypocrite pretending they were saving poor people from the powers that be.
Litigation culture is out of control in this country, and leads to more laws and regulations, more expense and people who make a living filing lawsuits.
Litigation culture is out of control in this country, and leads to more laws and regulations, more expense and people who make a living filing lawsuits.
0
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:02 am to NCIS_76
quote:That is how insurance WORKS, Cletus. You pay a premium precisely BECAUSE it let's you spread the risk.
Total fricking scam that has hurt the majority of policy holders. I'm paying for shite that someone else did because they wanted to sue a company and that one case adds up to maybe 1 million dollars.
quote:I THINK that this illiterate sentence is a complaint about contingent fee contracts. They aren't perfect, but the simple fact is that most injured parties could NOT afford to pay attorneys' hourly rates.
they lawyers get paid a large margin also, and they encourage people to get in touch with their law firm.
quote:It sounds like your complaint is mandatory auto insurance. Talk to your legislature.
I should not or anyone should be held financially liable for anyone's mistakes.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:03 am to financetiger38
quote:
Go chase an ambulance you parasite
Lol defense attorney who understands the system as opposed to your overbroad sheeple ignorance.
Tell us where the bad plaintiff attorney touched you......
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:05 am to Dex Morgan
PI trial lawyers rarely if ever go to trial and do nothing but raise insurance rates for everyone else. This has nothing to do with criminal defense attorneys, but you already knew that. Do better
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:06 am to NIH
quote:
The Judge is the professional jury. Both sides have a right to a bench trial.
And Judges deserve a lot of the blame in this discussion (Judges are lawyers too, of course)
Judges have the power to throw out frivolous claims, to coerce settlements, to shorten trials, and to alter a jury's damage award. A judge with balls can be a plaintiff's attorney's nightmare.
But they rarely exercise their power in that regard. I understand State judges have to run for reelection, so they can't afford to piss off the Plaintiff's bar.
Federal judges merely fear reversal. They usually have more backbone, but they could go further. I've never understood why federal judges tolerate so much nonsense.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:10 am to JediTiger2
quote:Why? In most cases, the insurance company for the injured party is subrogated to recover its monetary outlay, meaning that money eventually repays THAT insurance company.
The fact that you can sue for the full amount of medical damaged that are charged by the hospital/dr/etc. and not just what you had to pay is an issue.
quote:Must be a Louisiana thing. $40 in Texas.
The right to a Jury trial requires you make that request within 10 days of being served and costs you $5K
quote:Some sort of escrow account for future medical expenses is actually not a bad idea.
Someone mentioned the idea of putting all medical damages for future bills into an escrow account and that it must be distributed directly to medical bills. Anything that's left over after X years reverts back to the person/entity that was sued. Kinda like this idea
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:11 am to NCIS_76
Yes - and the fact that insurance companies believe in cost sharing. It is a joke they look at just the past three years for accidents and violations to decide when calculating premiums. Good drivers get screwed.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:11 am to Dday63
quote:
Federal judges merely fear reversal. They usually have more backbone, but they could go further. I've never understood why federal judges tolerate so much nonsense.
you must not practice in the same federal districts I do 
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:13 am to AggieHank86
quote:
That is how insurance WORKS, Cletus. You pay a premium precisely BECAUSE it let's you spread the risk.
I don’t know why you have to be such a dick when you know full well what’s being discussed is the AMOUNT of risk that our shite tort system allows.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:18 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Why? In most cases, the insurance company for the injured party is subrogated to recover its monetary outlay, meaning that money eventually repays THAT insurance company.
Because if you have health insurance and it only costs you $1500, but you were billed $100,000 you can sue for $100,000. That's some stupidity in Louisiana's laws. Maybe $1500 + court fees + lawyer fees, etc. But not the full $100,000 that's what makes insurance so damn expensive.
quote:
Must be a Louisiana thing. $40 in Texas.
Yes it is. This is the new 'tort reform'. JBE put this crap in the bill after it was passed during the reconciliation process. I believe it should have been 1% of 5K, but he struck through the 1% part. I might have those facts wrong, but it was something to this affect. The 10 days rule is also meant specifically to curb jury trials for these matters.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:27 am to JediTiger2
quote:
Because if you have health insurance and it only costs you $1500, but you were billed $100,000 you can sue for $100,000. That's some stupidity in Louisiana's laws. Maybe $1500 + court fees + lawyer fees, etc. But not the full $100,000 that's what makes insurance so damn expensive.
This was changed in the new reforms. Now it’s what was actually paid and the judge has the discretion to award up to 40% of the difference in billed versus paid after trial outside the presence of the jury.
Collateral source has been around since the mid-1800’s though
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:29 am to JediTiger2
quote:Again, WHY?quote:Because if you have health insurance and it only costs you $1500, but you were billed $100,000 you can sue for $100,000. That's some stupidity in Louisiana's laws. Maybe $1500 + court fees + lawyer fees, etc. But not the full $100,000 that's what makes insurance so damn expensive.
Why? In most cases, the insurance company for the injured party is subrogated to recover its monetary outlay, meaning that money eventually repays THAT insurance company.
In your hypo, the plaintiff recovers a judgment (or settlement) for $100,000, and HIS insurance company is entitled (through subrogation) to recover its entire outlay FROM that judgment/recovery. Net result? The insurance company for the wrongdoer (not the insurance company for the victim) ends-up paying the medical bills.
Again, Louisiana may be different, but Louisiana's entire legal system is generally (in my experience) fricked up.
In Texas, the insurance company has to recover those funds from the injured insured party, but as I recall from a few cases I handled in Louisiana a VERY long time ago, your insurance companies for the injured party can even intervene in the PI suit to assert their subrogation rights and thereby get paid directly. Hell, again as I recall from a LONG time ago, a PI plaintiff in Louisiana can DIRECTLY SUE the insurance company for the wrongdoer, too, which is just weird to anyone from outside Louisiana.
This post was edited on 8/31/23 at 10:34 am
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:33 am to AggieHank86
He’s talking about hospital bills $100 for procedure and BCBS pays the $40 contracted rate. We used to show jury the $100 and recover that but then pay BCBS their subgrogated $40. That $60 was the “windfall”.
But no one paid the plaintiff back for their premiums paid to secure that rate from BCBS. The new scheme tries to balance those interests.
But no one paid the plaintiff back for their premiums paid to secure that rate from BCBS. The new scheme tries to balance those interests.
This post was edited on 8/31/23 at 10:34 am
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:35 am to boosiebadazz
quote:Makes sense. Given his numbers of $1,500 and $100,000, I assumed he was referencing deductibles and co-pays.
He’s talking about hospital bills $100 for procedure and BCBS pays the $40 contracted rate. We used to show jury the $100 and recover that but then pay BCBS their subgrogated $40. That $60 was the “windfall”
Damn, but y'all's system is screwy.
This post was edited on 8/31/23 at 11:06 am
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:36 am to AggieHank86
It’s bedrock collateral source principles but we moved away from it.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:37 am to the808bass
quote:
Lawyers are a big part of the downfall of civilization.
Lawyers are to thank for the entirety of the United States Constitution.
Get this anti american shite outta here.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:37 am to JediTiger2
quote:This doesn't operate to curb jury trials. Just put the request in your answer.
The 10 days rule is also meant specifically to curb jury trials for these matters.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:39 am to AlxTgr
It was also meant to deter insurance companies from clogging up dockets with $15,000 cases. You wouldn’t get a trial date for six years if they didn’t have to put up the $5k cash to secure it.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:42 am to AlxTgr
quote:If you do that (which is what many Texas lawyers also do), are you automatically responsible in every damned case for that huge fee that he referenced?
The 10 days rule is also meant specifically to curb jury trials for these matters.quote:
This doesn't operate to curb jury trials. Just put the request in your answer.
It DOES seem that this policy is designed to deter jury trials (or at least jury demands). If "justice" is the goal, it makes a LOT more sense to set the deadline for demanding a jury trial AFTER the facts have been developed.
This post was edited on 8/31/23 at 10:47 am
Posted on 8/31/23 at 10:51 am to boosiebadazz
quote:I will never understand why people downvote this sort of simple, factual post.
It was also meant to deter insurance companies from clogging up dockets with $15,000 cases. You wouldn’t get a trial date for six years if they didn’t have to put up the $5k cash to secure it.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News