Posted on 01/25/2007 4:11:11 PM PST by Hurricane
A high-profile lawyer whose firm was paid more than $1 billion for helping negotiate a settlement with tobacco companies in the mid-1990s will earn a far more modest paycheck for his work on Mississippi's accord with State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. over Hurricane Katrina damage.
Richard "Dickie" Scruggs and other members of his legal team can collect up to $46 million in fees from Tuesday's accord with State Farm. The insurance company is expected to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to resolve more than 600 lawsuits and thousands of other disputed claims stemming from its refusal to pay for damage from Katrina's storm surge.
(Excerpt) Read more at wlox.com ...
Can anyone who understands insurance better than me explain why homeowners policies dont include floo insurance? Is it that hard to model and price in to policies?
If it weren't for the lawyers, the homeowners would take the the insurance company offered, and like it. Without the attorney the winner would be the insurance companies.
Just think, when there is another Clinton or maybe Obama in the White House, ( or both as Pres and VP), both are lawyers.
Someone should compile a list of presidential candidates both Dem and Repub who are lawyers.
I would imagine that it would be at least half.
The trial lawyers are looking to donate big time to the Dem candidate with the best chance of becoming President.
It is standard in the insurance industry that whenever a lawyer gets between the insurance company and the insured that the insurance company puts the brakes on the claims process and moves slowly to dot the I's and cross the t's. Most of the time the insured homeowner will get a settlement that is equal to or more than what would be the case with a lawyer. The reason being that the lawyer will take at least 1/3rd off the top.
The sad fact though is that the average person is uninformed about their insurance claim rights and rely on a lawyer to do what they could have done themselves by standing firm on their claim rights and document everything.
However, when homeowners have a coverage issue that the insurance company won't budge on as in Katrina, then all the homeowner can do is get a good lawyer that won't steal from them.
I dispute the premise that insurance companies are inherently fair in dealing with policyholders. I have seen many times, including in my own family, unfair terms offered to those in need of benefits. Fear of lawsuits is often what it takes to get the ball rolling and keep things fair. Who do you think is behind the tort reform movement?
Then he got himself a lawyer. He ended up getting $75K--and the lawyer took $25K!! Needless to say, he didn't get the property. I wonder how often that sort of thing happens...?
Flood insurance is only provided by the government program, NFIP National Flood Insurance Program. Therefore, all homeowners policies exclude flood (surface water). The federal program will continue to write and pay claims on property in flood-prone areas claim after claim after claim. The private insurers wouldn't touch a risk like that because it guarantees losses.
A government run program - did you know that New Orleans was not considered in a flood plain? Hence the rates there were as if the land were high and dry (because of the levees) Could you imagine private industry setting rates like that? Of course not, because they don't have the bottomless federal checkbook. Your tax dollars at work.
If I recall, part of this action was started by Trent Lott, who lost his beach home to the storm surge and did not have flood insurance, just homeowners with State Farm.
I'm an insurance agent. Hope this helps.
That kind of thing happens alot. Tragic cases like that are the sometimes the easiest to settle. In a death, the insurance company will pay the policy limits to the claimant quite often quickly, because it settles the case without expensive litigation.
I've seen many cases where the attorney nets more money than the claimant who was injured. The claimant may have to reimburse his health insurance company (or worker's comp program) for his medical expenses that they paid (coordination of benefits clause ) plus pay the attorney 25% to 50% of the settlement. i.e. $100,000 settlement, attorney gets $25,000 and claimant has to pay back $60,000 in medical bills. Claimant winds up with $15,000 for his pain and suffering and any lasting injuries.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.