General

Insurance Debate

December 11, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

This blog does not try to spend time on the health care debate occurring on the National scene. Rather the focus here is to make people aware of their rights as they relate to their dealings with insurance companies and why they need an experience Insurance Law Attorney when faced with a problem when dealing with an insurance company. The occassional news item is thrown in when it relates to a large number of people, some of whom may be in Texas.

Recent articles on the Chinese drywall, sold by Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin, affecting many residents along the Gulf Coast pointed out that new construction and remodeling done after hurricanes hit the areas on the Gulf Coast have left many homeowners in rough financial situations. This is because many insurance companies refuse to cover the losses resulting from using this drywall.

One recent article points out that the deadline for involvement in a national class action lawsuit against Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin expired on December 2. This lawsuit involves about 35,000 Florida homes where about 30 percent of the installations of this drywall are believed to have occurred.

Insurance Fraud Laws In Texas

December 5, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

A resident of Grand Prairie recently caught his insurance agent in Dallas committing fraud. The agent was taking the cash payments for the premiums from the resident and hand writing a receipt. Sounds okay so far. Next, the agent was pocketing the money rather than forwarding the payment to the insurance company. This could have happened in Arlington, Fort Worth, Weatherford, or anywhere else in Texas.

The agent would have continued to have got away with this except that the resident had an accident and got sued and when he turned the lawsuit papers over to the insurance company and was denied coverage the resident went to an experienced Insurance Law Attorney. A subsequent investigation revealed what was happening and a lawsuit is currently going forward against the agent.

Most of the time when people think of insurance fraud, they think in terms of someone staging a theft, an accident, or committing arson to recover monies from an insurance policy. This type of insurance fraud is defined and talked about in the Texas Penal Code, Chapter 35. Section 35.02, describes some of what constitutes an offense and also describes the penalty. The range of punishment is from a Class C misdemeanor, which is a ticket offense, all the way to a Felony of the First Degree, which is punishable by up to life in prison. The monetary cost includes fines up to $10,000, court costs, and restitution.

Duty To Cooperate With Your Insurance Company In Texas

November 30, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

The general rule in Texas is that a policy holder has a duty to cooperate with his insurance company when the insurance company is investigating a claim.

Whether your house in Arlington burns down or you have a vehicle wreck in Grand Prairie the answer is about the same. Ditto for a life insurance claim made in Weatherford or a health insurance claim made in Fort Worth. Every insurance policy is going to place upon you a duty to cooperate with the insurance companies investigation of the claim.

Generally speaking you would have a duty to report the claim as soon as is possible. You would be asked and expected to make a statement to the insurance company. Often times you are going to be asked to fill out reports and other paperwork. You may have to get estimates or appraisals. If the loss being claimed is for physical injury, then an independent medical exam performed by a Doctor of the insurance companies choosing may be necessary.

Does My Texas Insurance Company Have To Defend Me If I Get Sued?

November 25, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

An Appeals Court in San Antonio, Texas, has recently handed down a decison that discusses the above question. The case is, Lancer Insurance Company v. Oscar Perez, et al, and was decided on November 4, 2009.

The Lancer case involved members of a high school band going on an overnight field trip. The driver of a bus transporting the band was infected with active turberculosis. This disease was discovered by the passengers and subsequent tests proved positive for some of the band members. The bus driver and bus company were sued for negligently exposing the band members to the disease.

Upon being sued, the bus company made a written demand to Lancer to defend the lawsuit pursuant to the business automobile insurance policy Lancer had issued covering the bus. Lancer refused to defend and the case went to trial wherein the passengers were awarded $5.25 million in total damages.

Excluded Drivers In Texas Automobile Policies

November 24, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

Let’s say you are a Grand Prairie or Arlington resident. You purchased an auto policy from an agent in Fort Worth. The price quoted seemed way too high and you asked the agent if there was anything that could be done to get the premium lower. The agent says, “Yes, we can take your teenage son off the policy.” You say okay. The agent sells you a policy that excludes coverage if your teenage son is driving the car.

You can guess what happens next – the son drives the car and gets involved in a wreck. Now what? Numerous lawsuits have been filed in these situations and outcomes will sometimes be different depending on the facts of the accident and more importantly, the wording in the insurance policy that excludes the son.

Courts will look closely at the wording in the policy at issue but as a general rule, these exclusions are found by the Courts to be valid. It has been held that public policy dictates the allowance of such exclusions to enable insured motorists with children having bad driving records to secure insurance they can afford, rather than being relegated to securing coverage from an assigned risk pool at a much higher cost. This issue was discussed at length in the case, Wright v. Rodney D. Young Ins. Agcy. Wright was a 1995, Fort Worth Court of Appeals case.

Texas Windstorm Insurance Association Crying “Help”

November 22, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

The Texas Windstorm Insurance Association, has found itself in an unfortunate position. The position is a creation of their own actions. Those actions were actions whereby they refused to pay proper claims to policyholders who suffered damages because of the hurricanes, Ike, Dolly, and Rita.

TWIA is crying “help” because they are afraid they are going to be punished for not properly paying claims to their policyholders. They are asking that they be immune from paying penalties, policyholder attorneys’ fees, and other expenses coming out of litigation that resulted from their conduct.

The windstorm association is a state-created insurer and is claiming that because they are an instrument of government that they should have immunity. Lawyers for the policyholders say that TWIA is effectively a private company, and that immunity would effect the over 900 lawsuits pending against TWIA.

Small $$$ Insurance Claims And Staying Out Of Federal Court

November 16, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

It is not unusual for an attorney to wish he could land a case worth millions of dollars. Every person who gets taken advantage of by an insurance company wishes they could sue the company and be compensated for millions of dollars. But the reality of everyday wrongs in the area of insurance law involve sums of money totaling much smaller amounts than millions of dollars.

What most people do not realize is the costs sometimes involved in fighting insurance claims. Most of the time an insurance company is not all that concerned about the cost. Their goal is to discourage people from challenging their decisions on claims. A lawsuit in State Court may cost an insurance company anywhere from $100 per hour to $300 per hour. That same case in Federal Court may cost $300 to $600 per hour with more hours being spent.

So why do insurance companies try to get lawsuits that are filed in State Court, removed to Federal Court? Because their chances of winning is usually better or if they lose, the dollar amount they lose is generally less when in Federal Court.

Sueing The Texas Insurance Adjuster

November 15, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

There are many times where the insurance adjuster himself, commits a wrong against a policy holder. This is an important issue. Here is why. When an Insurance Law Attorney is representing a client in a claim there are a lot of strategies. One important strategy is to file a lawsuit in a court that is most favorable to achieving a favorable result. In that regard, State Court is almost always a better place to fight the insurance company than is Federal Court. Most insurance companies have home bases located out-of-state whereas 99% of adjusters will live in-state. This matters because the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that out-of-state defendants in a lawsuit be allowed to defend themselves in Federal Court unless there is more than one defendant and atleast one of the other defendants is an in-state resident.

For the reason explained in the first paragraph, it is important to be able to articulate a particular wrong that the in-state adjuster committed. The adjuster will be defended by an insurance company, usually the employer, thus a lawsuit against the adjuster in his individual capacity is not a futile act. Insurance company attorneys are going to always want to get the lawsuit removed to Federal Court if there is any way possible to do so. Repeating what was just said, this is because Federal Court is usually more favorable to the insurance company.

A case decided on October 27, 2009, discusses this issue. The case, Lakewood Chiropractic Clinic v. Travelers Lloyds Insurance Company and Sonja R. Victor, was a claim for benefits resulting from hurricane damages. Lakewood alleged that the adjuster, Sonja, violated several insurance statutes. Lakewood also alleged these same violations of Travelers. The problem here is that there was not a distinction made between what Sonja did and what Travelers did, that was wrong.

Recent Texas Insurance Policy Interpretation

November 10, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

The Texas Supreme Court ruled on an insurance policy interpretation case on October 30,2009. This case is, Chrysler Insurance Company v. Greenspoint Dodge of Houston, Inc.

This case involves an insurance coverage dispute, the topic of which is liability policies insuring a corporation and its officers and others. The corporation was sued for defamation. One key here is that the policies at issue excluded coverage for defamatory statements made by the insured, that the insured knew to be false. The lower court said that the employees involved may not have been “principles”, but were “vice-principles” and thus were covered under the policy.

Some facts here are that a Noe Martinez was fired by Greenspoint after the Greenspoint’s general manager, comptroller, and used car sales manager defamed and disparaged Martinez. The general manager’s nephew was hired to take Martinez’s place. Martinez sued and won.

What To Do In Texas When The Insurance Company Says There Is No Coverage Under The Policy

November 8, 2009 | Mark S. Humphreys

An incident happens. Maybe your house in Dallas has someone inside who falls down the stairs. Maybe your car in Arlington is involved in a wreck. Maybe your business in Grand Prairie suffers a loss due to someone falling on the steps. Maybe the life insurance policy you purchased on your Mom in Weatherford is now denying coverage, after the funeral. What if the disability policy you had on your wife’s job in Fort Worth is denied, after she becomes disabled?

If any of the above happens you actually have two main things you can do. The first and most common is to just sue the insurance company for various violations of the Texas Insurance Code and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. You can sue for breach of contract and fraud and misrepresentation and a few other things that are variations of the Insurance Code and DTPA causes of action.

The second thing that can be done is called a Declaratory Judgement cause of action. Attorneys refer to this as a “dec action”. This is where an attorney files papers with a Court saying, “Judge, declare this thing we have before you as (fill in the blank)”. A dec action is used quite often in insurance disputes. It is used both by attorneys for individuals requesting benefits under a policy and by insurance company attorneys asking the Court to declare that certain benefits do not exist within a policy.