re: Jeff Landry is Louisiana's biggest fraud and disappointment

quote:

---

why not create or dedicate a specific division in district court to handle all civil suits involving automobile crashes

---

We don't have the resources for that

quote:

---

increase the fee to file such case

---

Any fee increase that would make any sort of difference would result in the demise of our district courts.

quote:

---

establish a pretrial court mediation panel that must hear the case before going to trial.

---

There are already laws in place that require settlement negotiations to take place prior to trial. Setting up a required "mediation panel" will do nothing but line the pockets of whoever gets to be on the mediation panel. Also cases go to trial at an extraordinarily low rate. This wouldn't do anything.

quote:

---

Shorten the prescription period back to 1 year or less to ensure that when trials occur witnesses are still capable of recalling the accident and not retelling a different story after the age of time has changed their memory.

---

Rx on torts are already 1 year. The 2 year period (I'm assuming that's what you're thinking of) is related to bad faith property damage claims. What they need to do is put a real cap (like workers comp) on bad faith property damage cases. Right now, If you and your insurer disagree with the amount you're owed, you essentially automatically get double the disputed amount with how the law is written. You need to keep some incentive for attorneys to take the cases, but the fee split has to be reduced. If not, no non-domestic carrier is ever going to write a policy in LA ever again, and you'll be at the mercey of Louisiana Citizens where they're not punished at all for bad faith negotiations.

The AGs office (under Landry) fricked this state when they refused to prosecute the hurricane fraud cases.

quote:

---

It is also unfair to the insurance companies because they now have to pay interests for an additional year

---

Nope. You were right on everything else, though. Sure insurance companies would have to pay another year of interest, but they would also have use of the money for an extra year. These two things are supposed to balance out.

quote:

---

bel edwards was known in political circles as the most bought and paid for guy in the state.

---

FIFY, dummy. The only ones bitching and complaining right out of the box are the ones that are having their golden goose cut puff or they’re having to actually go to work IN an office/on the job and not continue to work from home like that mongoloid was allowing people to continue to do.

That little nugget is always left out by those that are bitching. Landry has mandated that all state workers must report to work (as applicable) and no longer work from home. The reason FOR that is to see who and what areas need to be cut since there were bums still working from home at the expense of the taxpayer.

So yeah, you people can bitch all you want because you’re getting a light shined upon your cockroach asses. (Not necessarily taking about you, unless you’re a gub’ment employee).

I haven't heard much of anything from Temple about auto insurance issues, it's all been about homeowners insurance from him.

Landry got a lot of campaign money from trial lawyers, and other trial lawyers sat this one out, not contriuting to the democrat in the race, which also helped Landry. This much is known.

It seems like every time the legislature atempts to fix things, they end up making it much worse.

So maybe vetoing garbage legislation - if that's what lands on his desk - is actually a good thing?

I think a BIG part of the problem is that there are many Republican attorneys in the legislature... and they are an attorney first and a Republican second.

Sheesh baw, you’re not the most patient person

quote:

---

Most of the “tort reform” bills pre-filed are extremely poorly drafted and wouldn’t not even approach the actual desired effect. Some are even blatantly unconstitutional.

---

This is what every lawyer says about every law that would cut into their revenue. Unimpressed.

quote:

---

the driver cannot show valid proof of insurance coverage for that date, the vehicle gets immediately towed. That driver and his vehicle should not be on the road. Period.

---

With it being such a rampant problem, seems like it would be a logical step to force a change. How hard would it be to have a program in place to follow up on offenders of this? Have some type of probation period for continued verification? 2nd offense, longer probation period, third offense suspended license for some period, etc.

quote:

---

There needs to be a law that if in an auto accident or speeding etc., and the driver cannot show valid proof of insurance coverage for that date, the vehicle gets immediately towed. That driver and his vehicle should not be on the road. Period.

---

Any reason proof of insurance can’t just be submitted to OMV? That way it’s attached to the license plate, cop can run it in the car.

Carlos is probably an "Illegal" that needs a forum to trash anything to make himself feel better

I know. I’m asking what that would be.

Genuine question.