Injuryboard Commentary - insurance

Deer: A Major Danger and Expense on Virginia Roadways

Jim Lewis — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 10:58:03 GMT

Close to 50,000 Virginians will file insurance claims for deer-related accidents at an estimated cost of nearly $15 million, according to the Fairfax Times. Virginia (VA) is currently ranked fifth out of all 50 states for deer-vehicle accidents and the frequency in which these accidents occur has increased 18 percent in the past five years, according to Reuters. It’s clear this is a major safety issue and an added risk while you’re behind the wheel.

It’s terrible if you wind up hitting a deer with your car. We’ve all seen the after-effects on the side of the road and the damage to your car can be extensive. Nevertheless, what’s even worse is to swerve in order to miss the deer and wind up slamming into another vehicle or veering off the road and hitting a tree or light pole. This can lead to a serious injury such as a broken back, lacerations to the face, a traumatic brain injury, or even death.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating pressing on the accelerator when a deer appears on the road, but the safety of you, potential passengers, and the other drivers on the road takes precedent over a deer.

You also need to be aware that only a comprehensive insurance policy covers deer-related accidents. This is important since 36 million Americans don’t have comprehensive insurance plans, according to USA Today. So not only is a deer accident dangerous, it can be costly if you’re not adequately insured.

The best piece of advice I can give you is be vigilant. The challenge with these deer-related accidents is that the animals leap out of nowhere onto the roadway providing very little reaction time for a driver. This is why you must always maintain eye contact on the road and be ready for anything that comes your way.

About the Editors: Shapiro, Cooper, Lewis & Appleton personal injury law firm (VA-NC law offices ) edits the injury law blogs Virginia Beach Injuryboard, Norfolk Injuryboard, and Northeast North Carolina Injuryboard as a pro bono service to consumers.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jim Lewis

Tort Reform, Lies, and Lady Justice

John Hopkins — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:37:17 GMT

It is all about reforming our tort system, right? I mean fixing the health insurance problem for millions of uninsured people is all about preventing the filing of lawsuits against negligent doctors and hospitals, right? We need to limit or eliminate the constitutional right to jury try for a certain class of citizen to provide health insurance for our citizens, right? We need to provide special immunities to certain professionals to fix the health insurance problem?

Who has a “problem” that any of this fixes? One class of “people” has a problem that this will fix: insurance companies. The insurance industry wants tort reform so the insurance industry can increase profits. It is, in fact, that simple.

No one has ever been able to provide me with objective evidence that contradicts any of the following:

There are not an abundance of frivolous malpractice suits being filed now and there has not been in recent memory.
Malpractice claims do not, watch my lips, do not drive up insurance costs. In fact, under oath, many insurance executives have repeatedly testified as such.
Doctors are not fleeing states because of malpractice claims. In fact it is the very, very small minority of doctors who are sued for malpractice.
Malpractice claims do not drive up insurance premiums across the whole population of physicians. Empirical evidence demonstrates that little correlation exists between malpractice claims and increased premiums. Insurance executives have, under oath, also testified to that fact.
Tort reform will never lower insurance costs. The insurance industry simply does not have a track record for doing that.

All of this is a distraction from accomplishing a solution to the real problem. How do we provide health insurance to millions of citizens who are without it? Legislators indebted to the insurance industry need to throw up road blocks and provide distraction they can trump up to be popular with many people in this country.

When 98,000 people die every year and many more are injured from medical malpractice. I must wonder if the tort reformers would be making statements they know are not true if medical negligence killed their wife, their husband, their mother, or their child. Of course they would not. In the height of absolute indifference to the suffering of victims, tort reformers fabricate, invent, and misrepresent; all to benefit an industry who is dumping big dollars into their pockets.

So, if they are successful with roadblocks and propaganda campaigns, the victim will include justice herself.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Hopkins

AAJ Debunks Myths About Medical Negligence

David Mittleman — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 12:46:56 GMT

President Obama promised a floor debate on health care reform in the House, and now that promise is coming to fruition. The debate is sure to include the classic opponents of healthcare reform, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, as well as other tort reform proponents such as the asbestos, insurance, and pharmaceutical companies. However, one of the most problematic arguments used by these groups is that medical malpractice lawsuits are the basis for the rising cost of healthcare and that the answer is not healthcare reform. Instead, they argue that limiting “frivolous lawsuits” is the panacea to our country’s healthcare cost woes.

The American Association for Justice (AAJ), a trial lawyers group based Washington, D.C, recently released a 30-page report (pdf) outlining the pertinent arguments of the debate. Specifically, the five myths the AAJ outlines are:

Myth #1: There are too many frivolous lawsuits, and curbing the number of lawsuits would cut down the cost of healthcare.

The actual number of lawsuits filed per year is questionable. What most people don’t understand is that trial lawyers don’t have near the financial power that an insurance company does. Specifically, insurance companies can spend enormous, and seemingly endless, amounts of money to win a case. Plaintiffs’ attorneys, on the other hand, are on very tight budgets and must question the validity of every case that might come their way. Wasting money attempting to prove a case that doesn’t have merit is nonsensical, so plaintiffs’ attorneys aren’t scooping up every case possible, contrary to popular belief.

While the number of frivolous lawsuits is questionable, the number of medical negligence cases aren’t: in fact, according to the Institute of Medicine’s 1999 “To Err is Human” report, 98,000 people are killed in hospitals each year from preventable medical errors.

Furthermore, a Hearts Newspaper Group “Dead by Mistake” investigation into medical malpractice found that the number of patients affected was closer to 200,000, when hospital-acquired infections were taken into consideration.

Are all of these individuals affected by medical negligence flocking to file lawsuits? Apparently not: according to a Harvard study, only 1 in 8 people injured by medical negligence filed a malpractice claim.

Other myths included in the AAJ report include:

Myth #2:

Malpractice claims drive up the cost of healthcare

Myth #3:

Doctors are fleeing

Myth #4:

Malpractice Claims Drive up Doctors’ Premiums

Myth #5:

Tort reform will lower insurance rates

For additional information on the myths surrounding healthcare reform and the costs of healthcare, see AAJ's "Debunking the Myths".

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Obtaining a Rental Car after an Accident

Greg Jones — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 09:53:47 GMT

Clients often come to our office because they are upset the insurance company for the at-fault driver will not rent a car for them after their car is damaged in an accident. They oftentimes ask if the insurance company is required to provide them with a rental car. They are often surprised at my response.

My clients are often surprised to find out the insurance company does not have a legal obligation to do anything for the accident victim. Their obligation is to the person they insure, not to the injured party. However, since the accident victim has a right to pursue a claim against the at-fault driver for the loss of use of their vehicle, the insurance carrier can usually be convinced to provide a rental car once they have completed their investigation. The adjuster handling the claim will have instructions to complete a list of tasks comprising their investigation of the claim regardless of how clear cut fault seems to be. We can assist the adjuster in completing this investigation in an effort to speed things along.

In addition, our client has the option of renting a car on their own. Oftentimes the insurance adjuster will agree to "take over" the rental once they have completed their investigation and our client will not be charged for the rental car at all. However, sometimes the insurance carrier will refuse to do anything more than reimburse the claimant for a rental car if they rent on their own. Unfortunately, insurance carriers have every right to take this position.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Jones

Guess What: The U S Chamber TV Ad Attack Really Did Need A Closer Look

Mike Bryant — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:27:00 GMT

Yesterday, I wrote about the U S Chamber's hypocritical attack on TV ads. What I didn't cover was a closer look at what was underlying the press release which went out to all of their conservative outlets. The numbers show that the US Chamber of Commerce study tracked spending on ads and actually shows that the spending has remained almost unchanged since 2006. There was a jump earlier in the decade. But get this, the number of spots have actually dropped since 2006.

So google these stories and you will find the implications that :

Oh my god lawyers are adding to the claims
Look lawyers know the gravy train is ending and are going all out
Look see this is the problem.

It's kind of funny how many of the "comments" actually say the exact same thing. But, the underlying support just isn't there. Yes, the study says the numbers are going down. So when do we hear that apology or maybe the turning of their growth theories on their head? Are the lower numbers actual proof that there is no problem?

The American Association for Justice, also pointed out that no matter the ad numbers the the National Center for State Courts shows an 8 percent decrease from 1997 to 2006 in states' civil caseload related to medical malpractice. "As usual, the Chamber is willing to bargain away injured patients' legal rights to protect the profits of their insurance and drug company financiers," Ray De Lorenzi, a spokesman for the association, said in a statement.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Unemployed and Uninsured

Ed Normand — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:41:17 GMT

So far in 2009, almost 300,000 Floridians have lost their health insurance, along with their jobs. The link between health coverage and the rise in unemployment is important, because nearly two-thirds of people under the age of 65 get health coverage through their employment, or the employment of a spouse. Florida ranks third in the nation, among working age-adults, in the number of people who have lost their health insurance since January 2009, behind only California and Texas.

Several options are available to those who become unemployed, including COBRA, where you pay to extend current health coverage, but oftentimes individuals do not have the necessary financial means. However, the current trend of citing tort reform as a means to reduce health insurance costs are misplaced. During a time when more and more individuals are needing to purchase insurance on their own, it might be easy for some to point the finger at the alleged “evil” of medical malpractice lawsuits. Much has been proposed about the potential reduction in insurance costs if awards in medical malpractice cases were capped, or eliminated altogether. What individuals don’t realize is that in actuality, little to no savings in premiums have resulted from current attempts at tort reform. In fact, insurance companies in Florida like Aetna, have stated that tort reform has produced little or no savings in insurance rates in Florida, due in part to lawsuits only making up a tiny fraction of the overall healthcare spending in the United States each year. Reducing costs needs to come from within the system, starting with reducing the myriad of preventable medical errors committed by the small percentage of bad apple physicians each year.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Auto Insurance Options- Protecting Yourself from the Unprotected

Aileen Wu Viorel — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:23:55 GMT

In several states including North Carolina, the law requires you to have insurance in order to have a license, but the law does not specify how much coverage the insured must have. Not all states follow this law, in many other states; insurance is not required at all. This insurance law that differs from state to state can lead to drastic problems if an accident occurs involving drivers lacking insurance. Imagine that a car ran a red light striking you and your vehicle. The accident itself caused severe damage including upwards of 70,000 dollars in medical bills. This is not including the cost to repair your car. The individual at fault has only 20,000 dollars maximum allotted in their policy agreement. This is obviously not enough; where does the rest of the money come from? There are many options that individuals can take to protect them from being in this position. When choosing auto insurance, most companies offer underinsured, uninsured protection, or Med Pay. These policy options are very inexpensive and because they are so inexpensive, most insurance companies do not suggest it to their customers. When choosing insurance, ask if these options are a possibility. This allows you to file a claim showing that the faulty party neither has insurance or adequate insurance to cover the cost of the damages. This will allow your insurance company to use your policy to help pay the damages. Another tool at your disposal is the Med-pay policy. Electing to include this in your policy will allow you to have coverage for each of your passengers and yourself in the event the faulty party does not have coverage to pay the cost of medical. Too many times we have seen clients suffer from sever injury or even the loss of a loved one because the person at fault had either no insurance or very limited insurance. It is never good to put your fate in the hands of other people. Look into options that will protect you and the ones you love.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Aileen Wu Viorel

St Paul Collision Sends Six To The Hospital

Mike Bryant — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:28:00 GMT

Saturday night, a intersection collision on Roberts Street, sent everyone involved to the Regions Hospital. A 1997 Chevrolet Cavalier pulled out of a shopping mall parking lot onto Robert Street and into the path of a northbound Mercury Mystique, which hit the Cavalier broadside on the driver's side. Investigation continues with involvement from Inver Grove Heights, Mendota Heights, South St. Paul and West St. Paul emergency units assisting.

Two people were thrown from the turning vehicle. Both were not wearing seat belts. They also were the most severely injured. Yet another reminder of the important of wearing a seatbelt from the minute you get into the vehicle.

If you are in an accident, make sure to get the names of anyone who indicates they saw what happened. If you witness an accident, check to see if everyone is OK and stay around or at least give the drivers your contact information. If you are injured, seek the advice of an attorney who does that kind of work and who can explain your coverages and rights.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Truck Spins Out And Kills Two in Otter Tail County

Mike Bryant — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:35:00 GMT

Friday afternoon, a truck lost control in the snow and hit an oncoming car head on. The crash occurred early Friday afternoon near the Otter Tail County town of French, about 6 miles west of Fergus Falls. Two people in the pickup,the driver and his mother were killed. Two others in the truck and the driver of the other vehicle were injured.

These deaths, like any other on Minnesota roads is particularly unfortunate considering it comes a month after the Minnesota Department of Public Safety (MDPS) reported that overall the number of highway deaths has been down for 2009 with more than 300 people having died this year in Minnesota traffic collisions. There were 458 deaths in 2008, which was a drop from 510 in 2007. In this tragic case, sorrow for the family of the couple killed goes out.

It's October, but tragedies like this remind us that we are just starting to see snow. It's never to early to be safe and review the winter road tips from DPS and MnDOT :

Always use seat belts.
Accelerate and decelerate slowly on icy/snow-covered roads to retain traction and avoid skids.
Do not use cruise control.
Do not “power up” hills, which may cause wheels to spin. Build momentum before reaching a hill and don’t stop while traveling uphill. Reduce speed before going downhill.
Know your brakes. Keep the heel of your foot on the floor and use the ball of the foot to apply firm, steady pressure on the brake pedal.
Give yourself plenty of travel time. Don’t put your schedule before safety.
Clear snow and ice from vehicle windows, hood, headlights, brake lights and directional signals.
Headlights must be turned on when it is snowing or sleeting.

Most police officers asked say the key is usually to Just Slow Down.

As with any death in a Minnesota motor vehicle collision, there are many issues that will need to be reviewed. My partner, Joe Crumley, addressed this topic in a recent article for the Minnesota Lawyers Trial magazine. I was interviewed last year on the same topic.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Medical Malpractice Insurers’ Profits Higher than 99% of All Fortune 500 Companies

Beth Janicek — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:58:31 GMT

The American Association for Justice (AAJ) recently released a statistic claiming that medical malpractice insurance companies’ average profits are higher than 99 percent of all Fortune 500 companies. AAJ points out that medical malpractice lawsuits only account for a small percentage of unnecessary costs. The bigger problem is medical errors and the profits of malpractice insurers.

The report released by the AAJ also states that the average profit of medical malpractice insurance companies is 35 time higher than the Fortune 500 average for the same time period, and that malpractice insurers have seen their profit margins range from 5.9 percent to 74.8 percent, with an average of 31.2 percent. In addition, the report finds that malpractice insurers have publicly overestimated their losses and underestimated their profits in an attempt to suggest that insurance business and medical practices face a crisis that must be resolved by tort reform. This report released by the AAJ shows that insurance companies profit the most, and obviously need Tort Reform the least.

AAJ President Anthony Tarricone said,

Insurance companies are gouging doctors on their premiums to mislead lawmakers…And today, injured patients are often left with no avenue to pursue justice, while health care costs continue to skyrocket.”

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Beth Janicek