Replies

I was a licensed insurance agent in Maryland in 1981. I have a claim with an insurance company now. The first claim in 17 years, I have never litigated an insurance company in court. Besides small claims squabbles, two in my life, I have never brought suit, even after back surgery from an on the job accident and two serious accidents in the 70's.

I was astonished at the manner in which the insurance company handled the claim I had after their driver ran two stop signs and t-boned me.

I oddly enough know the insurance industry and adjudications of suitability for hire, and the impact of credit rating upon them as well.

I knew that there had been a hegelian shift, or that the Maryland Insurance commissioners had become negligent in their oversight.

In short, I have not settled and thus had the emergency room bills sent to a credit collection agency as a result of the non-settlement.

Without attempting to put to trial the issues in this forum I can say that the insurance company repeatedly broke what would have been Maryland law when I sold insurance in 1981.

I have spoken with the insurance commisioner's office in MD and he essentially gave me the standard response that a formal complaint, blah blah...

But in summation the boxing gloves approach is coercive to lets say: a military personnel individual whom's spouse was injured, expenses were mounting, treatment was in progress, and the credit collectors had flagged that clearance of the spouse.

Ironically the Ins. commisioner was aware of the predatory lending and the impact it had had on clearances with active service members.

But he seemed unaware that 70% of all contested adjudications of suitability were declined for medical bills.

It has been years, a half decade since I have posted on this forum, but far from being boring, your article illuminates something that seems terribly wrong to me.

I abhore insurance fraud, hate the entitlement crowd, but also know from passing the insurance exam that what this company is doing is 'not in good faith' and constitued fraud, willfull ignorance, and was in violation of law.

Your article shed light on how a telemarketer type adjuster, whom admitedly had not taken a insurance exam, could use an expert system and provide crisp answers one moment, and then the next under focused questioning break the law with misrepresentations of the insurance law.

I'm not that happy of a camper with the Republicans, but still lurk by here for content.

Best article I have read in weeks.

It clarified how things deteriorated so badly in MD and why there needs to be people of principle to take a stand.

Great article, far from boring.

Agree. All State, State Farm, Nationwide and Farmers are all commercial pirates whose claims doctrine is to deny every claim, pay a few which they then hold up in advertisements as standard practice and spend millions to scam the public and grind claimants into the litigational mill grist. State insurance commisioners are political animals who know better than to buck these big time monied powers and thus turn their collective head, deflect complaints with rote fluff and otherwise leave the average citizen at the tender mercies of these business criminals. Were it not for the abilities and determination of a cadre of lawyers, the bad guys would get away with their tactics without a fight.

These insurance giants are not going to change their historic doctrine unless several states' legislatures, governors and insurance departments grow some cajones and enforce the statutes that exist but are ignored in practice.