I’m wondering if this is a fishing scam? WE have an iphone display at work and the phone number attached is a recycled and we get random texts and voicemails. TOday I listened to a vmail from an insurance company claiming the person was involved in an accident
i’m glad if i ever hit my car, i will have T-Nation to count on.
[quote]Cuban32 wrote:
BG is right, this is a claim, WHY THE FUCK ARE PEOPLE QUESTIONING PEOPLE WHO ARE OR HAVE DONE THIS FOR A LIVING. I am not trying to sound arrogant but i and bg know what we are talking about. All advise besides me and BG’s on this thread IS WRONG, no other way to put it.[/quote]
Because you are claims adjusters. Look, I have no doubt you are trained to believe the crap you are saying, but I made a lot of money early in my carrier suing (and defending) insurance companies because they intentially train you people wrong, and in a manner that feeds the bottom line.
Do insurance companies settle insiginificant no-merit claims without the consent of the insured? Yep, all the fucking time. Throw a thousand to settle a nuisance claim, ignore your insured’s protests, call it a “loss,” and crank up the rates by $500. In three years, you’re ahead, even it was not a meritorious claim. Standard Operating Procedure.
As noted, if this was a legitimate carrier calling, they would have insurance information (assuming registration and insurance are linked; most states they are not). This sounds like a complete fishing scam. If it’s not, it will work itself out.
Also, for an insurance company to deny a claim for failure to timely report, the carrier has to prove it was “prejudiced.” This claim came 4 months after the supposed accident. Any theoretical information was long gone already. No way the carrier could show prejudice.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]Cuban32 wrote:
BG is right, this is a claim, WHY THE FUCK ARE PEOPLE QUESTIONING PEOPLE WHO ARE OR HAVE DONE THIS FOR A LIVING. I am not trying to sound arrogant but i and bg know what we are talking about. All advise besides me and BG’s on this thread IS WRONG, no other way to put it.[/quote]
Because you are claims adjusters. Look, I have no doubt you are trained to believe the crap you are saying, but I made a lot of money early in my carrier suing (and defending) insurance companies because they intentially train you people wrong, and in a manner that feeds the bottom line.
Do insurance companies settle insiginificant no-merit claims without the consent of the insured? Yep, all the fucking time. Throw a thousand to settle a nuisance claim, ignore your insured’s protests, call it a “loss,” and crank up the rates by $500. In three years, you’re ahead, even it was not a meritorious claim. Standard Operating Procedure.
As noted, if this was a legitimate carrier calling, they would have insurance information (assuming registration and insurance are linked; most states they are not). This sounds like a complete fishing scam. If it’s not, it will work itself out.
Also, for an insurance company to deny a claim for failure to timely report, the carrier has to prove it was “prejudiced.” This claim came 4 months after the supposed accident. Any theoretical information was long gone already. No way the carrier could show prejudice.[/quote]
As long as we’re going to be arrogant (big surprise coming from an attorney), I spent most of my career TELLING YOU GUYS WHAT TO DO. I was Director of Litigation for a large malpractice carrier, and I handled complex litigation, INCLUDING COVERAGE LITIGATION, for most of my 20 years. I’ve been the guy to make the call on verdicts as high as 27mil and I’ve routinely settled claims in excess of 10mil. FTR I worked for a time in AIG’s Excess and Surplus claim unit where you won’t find more complex and/or high exposure claims ANYWHERE in one place. I haven’t been a “claim adjuster” since 1993. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen more coverage cases, and more complex litigation than you have seen in your entire career. Unless of course you’ve ever handled or supervised 100s of claims at one time? Now that we’ve gotten our respective qualifications out of the way…
If a company decides to settle a claim because it’s cost effective, they are serving their insureds as a whole - not “training their people wrong”. There is a big difference between COMPROMISING a DISPUTED claim (damn near every fucking claim involving two parties is “disputed”) and paying non-meritorious or fraudulent(on their face) claims. Comparing the compromising of disputed claims v. paying non-meritorious claims is intellectually disingenuous or horribly misinformed. Take your pick.
Whether the dollars come from loss or expense, it’s still shouldered by the policyholders at large - it’s called “combined ratio”, and it’s the measure of profitability for a line of business. An insurance company is not doing its policyholders any favors if it spends 10,000 paying one of you lying cheating whores (I’d love to educate people here about the typical defense firm billing hamster-wheel-of-fraud) to defend a claim it can ultimately compromise for less.
Neither you nor an insurance company operates at a loss (well, some insurance companies actually have underwritten business at a loss in the past but did so in the days when the stock market allowed them to make it up on investment dollars). We don’t do “Pyrrhic victories” unless the claim has no merit or is fraudulent. Pyrrhic victories cost money. Loss or Expense, it’s still shouldered ultimately by the policyholders.
There is no consent to settle clause within your typical auto insurance policy (or any “personal line” policy for that matter), and “consent” is completely irrelevant to any advice given OP. If there were a consent to settle clause in your typical auto policy, you’d really be complaining about premiums. What every policy DOES contain however, is something called CONDITIONS, and your adherence to those Conditions are precedent to coverage. No compliance, no coverage. And those Conditions indisputably require an insured to report a claim, OR RISK NOT HAVING COVERAGE FOR THE CLAIM. I have denied or authorized the denial of 100s of claims based on late reporting and MOST OF THOSE WERE ULTIMATELY UPHELD. Did you know in some States, the carrieR need not even show prejudice to deny a late reported claim? That little more than 30 days delay can be enough? It’s one thing to advocate “taking your chances” - it’s quite another to arrogantly (and wrongfully) advise someone over the internet that he can’t possibly lose his coverage for it.
Yes, compromising “nuisance claims” occurs every day - that’s different from settling a non-meritorious claim like the one OP is describing. And while you’re waxing poetic about settling nuisance claims, why don’t you baffle us with your knowledge of how policies are priced? Although something called “frequency” (multiple claims per policyholder in this context) can affect your rates, a one time claim that you were not responsible for is more unlikely to affect your rates than you are to ever deadlift 600lbs 
And your closing statement is either absolutely WRONG or horribly constructed. In one breath, you claim a carrier has to show prejudice (depends on the State, but you’re generally correct) and in the next, you say the accident is 4 months old and any information is “long gone already” - which is the fucking essence and basis for such “prejudice”. That the information is likely indeed “long gone” is the very basis for the carrier to claim prejudice - that they cannot perform an effective investigation! Maybe what you meant to say is that there was no information then (an assumption), and there will be none now (a reasonable assumption if the first assumption is correct). In other words, “no harm, no foul”. So for a claim OP’s carrier “wins” 10 times out of 10, you are legally advocating (with incomplete information) to “take his chances”.
And if it’s not a “legitimate carrier”, HIS insurance carrier will figure that out! Seriously, where the fuck did that comment come from? If he’s dealing with a subrogation department, he’s likely getting the equivalent of a clerk - not exactly the best and brightest. No one here said to reply to them! We said to forward it to your Agent, and let them deal with it!
The “hoping it goes away strategy” - brilliant!
Your unqualified(unqualified because you have incomplete information and do not offer even one cautionary disclaimer) advice is terrible, but since you’re so familiar with “nuisance claims”, I have a helluva feeling for your practice. And seriously, LOL at the “intentionally trained you wrong” and the not too thinly veiled derisive use of “claim adjuster”. I know “claim adjusters” that make over six figures a year, and didn’t have to go to law school or bill 2800 hours a year, or work 6 years in a firm trying to make partner, only not to make partner, then have to start over again at another firm. And last I recall, an inordinate amount of lawyers would not have done it all over again if they could start over. Doing 6 figures and going home at 5 aint such a bad deal compared to the lot of defense lawyers I know.
/rebuttal
/rant
[quote]Hallowed wrote:
So that is the three Insurance Professionals or prior Insurance Professionals that I know of on TNation all saying to report it…
yeah.[/quote]
You were trained wrong. LOL