Young Insurance LawYoung Insurance Law2023-12-07T05:10:55Zhttps://www.younginsurancelaw.com/feed/atom/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/sites/1101005/2019/05/cropped-site-icon-1-32x32.jpgOn Behalf of Young Insurance Lawhttps://www.younginsurancelaw.com/?p=486562019-12-12T14:53:29Z2019-12-12T14:53:27ZFrom minor injuries to major accidents that lead to permanent disability, workers’ compensation claims often provide essential financial assistance to employees who face physical or other harm while on the job. In Michigan, most private companies and all public employers must carry some form of worker’s compensation insurance.Employers who do not perform their due diligence in recognizing employee injury reports and following through with insurance claims may face steep penalties. In a recent example from East Lansing, a former city employee won both an $85,000 compensation claim for injury and a $40,000 settlement for wrongful termination.When employers fail to prioritize worker safetyThe employee in question originally filed a lawsuit against the city in March of 2019, roughly three months after his firing on Dec. 31, 2018. A former pump mechanic specialist with nearly 10 years’ experience in his position, the worker claimed that his termination was the result of both an injury compensation claim and repeated reports to state agencies about health and safety violations.East Lansing City Council unanimously agreed to support the worker’s suit, including both medical expenses and compensation for unfair termination. The former wastewater treatment employee alleged that the city had failed to make known a 2007 study identifying the risk of asbestos exposure to site workers and even attempted to minimize the results of the report. The suit also claimed that the city facility neglected to properly clean or report a potentially dangerous mercury spill in 2013. In addition to paying out $125,000 as part of the November 2019 settlement, East Lansing faced two fines from MIOSHA for safety issues related to asbestos and mercury that the city had failed to address.Being proactive about claims is importantWhen an employee gets injured on the job, a worker’s compensation policy should provide her or him with the necessary financial assistance. Unfortunately, insurance vendors often do their best to avoid approving injury claims. Making sure to report a worker injury to the insurance carrier as soon as possible and providing the company with any needed documentation is essential for making the process go smoothly.]]>On Behalf of Young Insurance Lawhttps://www.younginsurancelaw.com/?p=486532019-10-25T04:43:05Z2019-10-25T04:43:02ZMichigan car insurance premiums are the highest in the nation, thanks in part to a unique requirement that motorists purchase unlimited Personal Injury Protection coverage. Last May, the governor signed a new law that aims to reduce insurance costs by allowing policyholders to opt out of unlimited medical benefits and instead choose their own rates.However, at the beginning of October, two crash victims and a rehabilitation center focused on brain injuries challenged the new law. Their suit claims that two of the provisions it includes are unconstitutional and may harm individuals who suffer catastrophic injury by limiting care options.Two provisions under scrutinyOne provision in question would put a cap of 56 hours per week on reimbursement for in-home care by a family member for an auto accident victim that requires assistance with basic daily tasks. In addition to arguing that such a cap may be illegal, the suit contends that limiting reimbursement could harm those retroactively denied the vested contractual rights included in their insurance policies. For instance, one of the plaintiffs in the suit currently receives reimbursement for his wife’s family-provided, 24-hour care at home after a drunk driver hit her in 2014. Left unchanged, the new law may force his family and others in a similar position to hire outside assistance instead.The second provision under scrutiny would gradually reduce the amount that hospitals and other care facilities can charge for treating or rehabilitating accident victims. The suit contends that such fee schedules could prove prohibitive for providers that offer specialized care.An evolving insurance landscapeAs the only state in the nation with a mandate for auto insurance policies with unlimited medical coverage, many supporters of the new law argue that it is essential for bringing down steep premiums. However, it also seems likely that these will not be the first legal challenges the law will face before taking effect in 2020 and 2021. Policyholders and providers need to be diligent to ensure that their right to needed reimbursement remains intact.]]>On Behalf of Young Insurance Lawhttps://www.younginsurancelaw.com/?p=484912019-06-18T03:51:48Z2019-06-18T03:51:47ZState Farm's tarnished good neighbor image
Presumably, when a neighbor borrows a new electric hedge trimmer and breaks it, he will immediately replace it with a new, identical model--the unspoken honor code between good neighbors. Imagine the owner's dismay at receiving a used, rusty pair of manual shears from his neighbor instead; or worse, suppose the neighbor refuses to replace the hedge trimmer.
As millions of customers alleged, State Farm's replacement parts were cheap, poor-quality generics, not the new, factory fresh parts promised them in their auto insurance policies. Also, many customers' reported the insurance company flatly denied legitimate claims. According to customers with accepted claims, the process dragged on so long, they gave up hope of seeing their vehicles repaired and restored to them.
Good neighbors do not buy legal favoritism
Imagine further that the owner of the now-useless hedge trimmer sued his neighbor in small claims court, only to lose the case when the judge said: "Get over it and move on; things break in life. Verdict for the defendant!" Later, a friend said he saw the defendant hand the judge some cash just before the trial. The owner, with his witness in tow, filed a suit against the judge for corruption and won. The court also ruled against the man's not-so-good neighbor for property damage and felony bribery.
The RICO class-action suit against State Farm
Millions of State Farm auto policyholders alleged the insurance giant raked in profits by using cheaper, substandard replacement parts in vehicle repairs. State Farm was in danger of losing billions to auto insurance customers for fraud. Meanwhile, compelling evidence of a RICO violation revealed that State Farm had funneled millions of dollars to a certain judge's election campaign to fill a new vacancy on the Illinois State Supreme Court. The court was the location of the class-action State Farm trial activity. The candidate favored by State Farm won. The new judge immediately overturned a billion-dollar settlement against State Farm awarded previously by a lower court to the class action litigants.
In 2018, on the eve of a $9 billion Illinois class-action trial, State Farm settled out of court, paying the defendants $250 million to drop the case and hold State Farm guiltless. An attorney for the plaintiffs opined corporations did not fork over that much money unless they were on shaky ground. He said the settlement spoke for itself. Perhaps the attorney believed State Farm did not trust its used, generic tire jack to successfully lift the case out of court. The American Association for Justice listed State Farm fourth on its 10 worst insurance companies in the United States for denying claims and raising premiums.]]>On Behalf of Young Insurance Lawhttps://www.younginsurancelaw.com/?p=484242019-05-10T14:06:43Z2019-05-10T12:38:02ZWe established this blog to share stories and information about topics relevant to our practice. Our intent is to regularly provide posts highlighting legal issues of local, state and national interest that we think you will find interesting. Check back later for updates.]]>