Why is the Insurance Company Not Named as the Defendant in the Lawsuit?

I had a good question today by a reader that inquired as to why he had to file suit against the person that harmed him without putting down the insurance company that he had been dealing with.  That is an excellent question and presents so many layers of legal analysis that I am merely going to skim the top and provide a somewhat basic version.

It's because insurance companies lobby big money to be the "man behind the curtain" without ever truly having the target on their backs.  In a trial you can not mention "insurance" for either party regardless of type, ie health insurance, homeowner's insurance, and automobile insurance. Those are considered collateral sources and are not to be given weight by an impartial jury. Yes, yes, we all know about "insurance" even if we were in that magical jury box but it can not be talked about in court by either attorney, plaintiff, or defendant

We all know that when you are harmed/injured in a wreck by the negligence, omission, and/or ignorance of another, that person's liability insurance will have to assess the personal injuries and property damage that arise out of all wrecks. OR the "uninsured" policy of your automobile insurance will cover the property damage and personal injuries because the at fault person is without insurance.  Yes, that means your insurance company defends the at fault party against you.

Often times after you leave the scene of the wreck, or incident, in question you never speak with the responsible party. However, you are contacted by the responsible party's insurance company that then gives you the cold shoulder or acts like you did something wrong.  (I appreciate them doing that because it makes my life so much easier).

OR in a really ironic turn of events, your insurance company then defends the at fault party against you because they really don't want you to just walk away with those premiums you have paid for the past couple years.  You have to earn them by fighting your own insurance company for compensation for your injuries and property damage! Hilarious, I know.

Seek legal advice anytime insurance companies are involved. You don't have to retain legal counsel but it doesn't cost you anything to hear what the law really is in a personal injury case vs. what insurance adjusters reading from a computer to save their company money say it is.

I'm just sayin....

 

 

If We Only Had to Pay Insurance Reimbursed, Reduced and/or Recommended Prices

I am amazed every day with comments made by insurance adjusters or agents, servants, and/or employees working on behalf of insurance companies. Regardless of whether it has to do with my personal health insurance, automobile insurance, property insurance, and/or other types of insurance.

It all boils down to insurance companies belittling, discrediting, discounting, ignoring, amending, omitting, and/or re-creating invoices, or bills, legitimately charged by professionals for services rendered.--Trey Mills

Let's look at a few recent examples I have run across just this week:

  1. I needed medical treatment so I went to a medical professional, aka, a medical doctor. This medical professional went to school for over 20 years to be a licensed medical professional. The physician provided me with medical advice and treatment I needed. I filed it on my health insurance and when it was all said and done out of the $110.00 bill, my insurance company discounted it by $55.00 for a "network discount".  I paid my $25.00 co-pay and because I have not met my $2,000.00 deductible, I owe the $40.00  remainder.  What the heck did the insurance company pay for? I am pretty sure if I was uninsured and had the ability to pay in cash I would have gotten a 50% reduction = $55.00. Instead, since I had health insurance, I had to pay $65.00. (Health insurance is truly for cancer and other catastrophic injuries/illnesses that happen in life. Other than that, bend over). There was a great article in the L.A. Times entitled "Why Require People to Buy Health Insurance". Admittedly, I would rather have things privatized than governmentalized but what is the difference between an extra tax and mandating people pay insurance premiums? You say tomato. I say tomato.
  2. I wrecked my car so I went to the only local certified manufacturer of my car within 100 miles and had the parts repaired and replaced. Since the wreck was not my fault, I notified the at fault party's insurance company and requested they pay my repair bill (actual costs), my rental bill (loss of use), and depreciation. The at fault insurance company discounted my repair bill by over $300.00 because they felt it was over priced, offered me $10 a day for a rental car, and said that they do not recognize depreciation. (South Carolina law does and when I filed "Arbitration Pleadings" they paid me almost double their original offer). 
  3. I have rental property so I needed insurance for those rental properties. One of my houses is centrally located within four houses from Falls Park in Greenville,SC. The lot alone is valuable, not to mention the "historic" two story house that is being remodeled. However, the replacement costs for the house, per the insurance estimate, is astonishingly low. I wonder what builders or estimators are providing those costs? I need to get them in there remodeling the house but then again, it would probably be put back together with glue and toothpicks.

"If I only had a ........