Insurance History and Inchmaree

I first learned of the Inchmaree clause when I met Howard Candage.

Howard is an expert in marine insurance and one of the best insurance people I know. Up to the time we met (2o something years ago), I knew next to nothing about marine insurance. Howard taught me a great deal.

The Inchmaree clause extends coverage to include losses caused by unseen defects in a ships hull, machinery, equipment, bursting of boilers, errors in navigation, negligence of its captain and crew.

The Inchmaree was a UK ship involved in the 1887 case Thames & Mersey Marine Insurance Co v. Hamilton, Fraser & Co. The court ruled that the peril of negligence was not a part of the ship's insurance policy.

The clause was developed after the court case so as to provide coverage.

The perils included in the Inchmaree clause are now a part of the "risks" sections of hull policies and are sometimes called, "other perils, losses or misfortunes."

Inchmaree is a small island in Scotland.

GM to abandon taxpayers it hurt with defective products

Urgent Action Alert — Contact the White House THIS AFTERNOON to Protect Catastrophically Injured Victims of Defective GM Cars

Unless we act TODAY, the White House will allow General Motors to abandon over 300 consumers seriously hurt by defects in GM vehicles by extinguishing the company's responsibility for these victims. This is a cruel, immoral and un-American result because GM decided last Friday to take responsibility for injuries caused by vehicles in the future. But the company is washing their hands of consumers they have already hurt. PLEASE CALL OR FAX THE WHITE HOUSE TO STOP THIS TRAVESTY: PHONE: 202-456-1414. FAX: 202-456-2461.

What kind of company would abandon a catastrophically injured child, a woman paralyzed from the neck down, and hundreds of others who have been injured by defective GM cars?  How can our government leave these consumers with no protection -- especially when these are the same consumers who bailed out GM in the first place?  And who would want to buy a car from a company that treats consumers this way?
 
Time is running out.  On Tuesday, General Motors will attempt to officially leave these injured families behind in the bankruptcy process.  We must take action today to make sure that GM is responsible for the cars they have put on the road  -- as well as cars they build in the future.

The Obama Administration's "Auto Task-Force," which is lead by the Treasury Department, is directly responsible for this decision.  There are only a limited number of hours left in the bankruptcy process.  Contact them THIS AFTERNOON to make sure that they know Americans will not stand for leaving hundreds of injured families behind in the GM bankruptcy process.   Tell them we will not buy their cars until these families are protected.  And we will not stop speaking up until GM takes full responsibility for injuries caused by all GM cars.  PLEASE CALL OR FAX THE WHITE HOUSE TO STOP THIS TRAVESTY: PHONE: 202-456-1414. FAX: 202-456-2461.

Thank you,


Les Weisbrod
AAJ President

$500 offer on personal injury case???

"A $500.00 OFFER?"

I  received a thank you note from a client.  I have to tell you, that is a real perk of my job.

I am blessed to receive thank you notes, cards, homemade pies and even old fishing baits (that I collect) from clients.

This letter recounted how an adjuster tried to get this injured man to sign a release soon after his car accident, offering to pay him just $500.00, before he ever hired me. 

He shared, "I settled for $24,500.00... You did an outstanding job handling my case..."

I was happy that he was pleased with the results. I know that, in the end, my successful cases conclude with a check for more than people can get on their own.

But, I was honestly much more touched by another part of the letter. He concluded, "I've talked to other lawyers in the past... They made me feel like a number... But you made me feel very comfortable." With all the lawyer jokes and so forth, it is reassuring to receive these type of compliments.

The moral of the story is this: The insurance company has no incentive to pay you a fair settlement without an attorney in the case of a serious injury.

When you hire a lawyer, you are starting a relationship. Interview your prospective attorney with that in mind.

If you feel uncomfortable with the first visit, you may wish to reconsider.

In the end, your lawyer is only paid if you are.

Burnham's Insurance Dictionary

Many of my readers are insurance people - even though most of my posts are geared to insurance buyers...

This one is for the insurance pro.

Ray Burnham has just come out with a 900 page, $295 insurance dictionary. It is clear he has worked on this for years. It is an amazing work. Every insurance professional should have a copy of this book in the office.

There are 20 different definitions of "coinsurance!"

"Occurrence" has 7 different definitions.

You'll find definitions for such little used terms as "inchmaree clause," and "use and occupancy."

When an old-timer talks about a "daily," you can find it in Ray's dictionary rather than having to ask someone.

Useful terms for current usage too. Do you know what a Cyberdog is?

Well done Ray.

writing a book is HARD

I amazed when I stand at Barnes and Noble that everyone of those authors worked as hard on a book as they must have. I have been at it for over a year, sometimes do not touch it for a while and other times really lose myself in the whole novel writing thing. 

Just finishing it will be rewarding and all the more so if it ever gets published, and if i could dream here for a moment, made into a movie.  

As I just started the blog, I will try to update my adventure in the literary wilderness from time to time.  At least now I am working on the ending.  Whew!

Mind Numbing Endorsements

Two years ago Business Insurance magazine published my letter to the editor commenting on the issue of prolific endorsements to insurance policies.

For example, a 12 page policy with 30 pages of endorsements changing every aspect of the original contract.

Read it here.

No change. I recently received a liability policy where every page of the original policy had at least 4 endorsed changes.

There has got to be a better way.

Pierringer-type Agreements

Pierringer-type agreements are exotic sounding. But are they really useful or worthwhile using in everyday insurance-type cases?

It seems to me that in the proper circumstances they can, in fact, be quite useful. And they are not really as complicated or exotic as they might at first seem.

They are useful where one defendant is willing to settle with the plaintiff while the other defendant is not.

The agreement simply permits the plaintiff to settle with the "settling defendant" but proceed with the action against the "non-settling defendant".

Such an agreement was approved by the Ontario Court of Appeal in JM and WB, 2004 O.J. No 2312, 71 O.R. (3d) 171 (C.A.).

The agreement should provide:

1. That the settlement and payment contemplated are not to be taken as an admission of liability on the part of the settling defendant;

2. That the action will be dismissed as against the settling defendant, on consent and without costs;

3. That the plaintiffs will use their best efforts to cause any crossclaims against the settling defendant to be similarly dismissed, without costs, in order to fully and finally conclude all litigation arising from the matters pleaded in the action against the settling defendant;

4. A full and final release by the plaintiffs in favour of the settling defendant;

5. That the plaintiffs will indemnify and hold harmless the settling defendant from any crossclaim or third party claim, and any other proceeding or claim arising from the issues and allegations in the within action; and

6. For the disclosure of the agreement, including the settlement amount provided thereunder, to the trial court, on certain conditions.

The indemnity provision should state that the plaintiffs restrict their claim to whatever the non‑settling defendants may be directly liability for and, as such, non-settling defendants cannot be jointly liable with the settling defendant.

This means that non-settling defendants have no basis to seek contribution, indemnity, relief over by way of equitable subrogation, declaratory relief or otherwise against the settling defendant.

An order should then be obtained dismissing the plaintiffs’ claim against the settling defendant, after which the plaintiffs amend their statement of claim, on consent, to reflect its compromises in its claim detailed in the Pierringer agreement, stating as follows:

The plaintiff has agreed with the settling defendant that it shall limit its claims against the non-settling defendants to claims for damages, costs and interest attributable only to the non-settling defendants share of liability to the plaintiff (and joint liability to one another, if any, and if there is more than one non-settling defendant) such that the plaintiff’s recovery shall be limited to recovering the damages, costs and interest attributable to the non-settling defendants’ several share of liability (or joint share of liability if more than one non-settling defendant) as proven against it or them at trial.

For greater certainty, the plaintiff shall have no claim directly or indirectly against the settling defendant and the plaintiff shall limit its claim against the non-settling defendant so as to exclude any crossclaim or third party claim made against or which could be made against the settling defendant arising from the issues in this action.

The plaintiff admits that the Court at any trial of this matter has and shall have full authority to adjudicate upon the apportionment of liability, if any, between all defendants named in the Statement of Claim, including the settling defendants, whether or not the settling defendants remain as parties by crossclaim or third party claim in this action.

The terms of the agreement listed above, plus amendments to the Statement of Claim, were approved by the Court of Appeal for Ontario in the above-noted decision.

California Governor Proposes Selling Some State Workers' Comp Insurer Assets

Interesting move! While most politicians are socializing insurance, Gov. Arnold is selling off parts of a state run insurer.

Article Here

Economy Puts Ethical Pressures on Agents

In my insurance travels I have found that most insurance agents are honest.

However, here is a 3 minute video from the Insurance Journal that points to an increase in premium theft by insurance agents.

Key signs that your agent is not forwarding your premiums to your insurance company:

-You never receive an insurance policy. When you ask, your agent provides you with another binder and offers excuses.

-Claims are paid with an insurance agency check rather than a check from the insurance company.

-Simple claims are dismissed by your agent that should be paid. You receive no declination from the insurance company and no adjuster calls.

-Most personal insurance premiums are "direct-bill" from your insurance company. However, you receive an agency invoice on your personal insurance with a request that you make the check out to the insurance agent or to a name different from the insurance company name.

-Your insurance agent offers a discount for cash or for a check made payable to the agent.

Of course all of the above can be legitimate mistakes or a different process for any particular insurance company. However, it pays to keep your eyes open.

The best way to avoid this is to deal with insurance agents well known in your community and remember the old adage...

If something seems to good to be true, it probably is.

Worker Fraud on the Uptick

The June issue of Best Review includes a brief piece on the observation by fraud examiners that worker fraud is increasing.

The article admits that this may be a "chicken and egg thing" with the current economy - are people stealing because times are bad or are employers being more diligent in the bad economy looking for problems?

In any event, it points to the need for employee dishonesty insurance.

Call your agent. Ask if you have employee dishonesty coverage. If not, schedule an insurance review immediately to learn what other coverages you're missing.

Consider my insurance assurance workbook to help you learn the questions to ask your agent to be sure you have the right insurance protection.

Is life insurance important in a recession?

Author: Tanisha Williams
Detroit is one of the cities that has been hit the hardest in this economic downturn. Detroit has suffered enormous job loss, lay offs and foreclosures. Many people wonder is insurance needed and is it affordable?

Well, the answer is yes. In hard times such as these, it is never smart to stop paying your life insurance premiums or for some not investing in at all. Life insurance offers many options to choose to protect your family.

Mortgage term insurance is the most cost effective way that a person can protect their family. By having this type of insurance in place, will allow for their mortgage to be paid off in full if the breadwinner were to die. Another option is traditional term insurance. This type of insurance can also cover your mortgage, final expenses, spousal and family income support or to ensure that your children will go to college. Term insurance in this economy is very affordable and needed more than ever.

I don't need life insurance, I'm only 35!

I was visiting my associate the other day and popped my head into her office to ask how her day was going. She had a puzzled look on her face and said, "I've had better days. Have you ever had to deliver on a life insurance claim?" The look on her face was one of complete and utter sadness. She went on to tell me that three years ago she had sat with her client to discuss life insurance. He was a young man with a wife and three children. He really believed that at the age of 35 he was too young to be seriously looking at life insurance. However, my associate saw it differently and continued to educate his wife and him. At the end of their conversation, he and his wife decided to apply for a life insurance policy in the amount of $1.5 million to protect him and his family. Little did they know that in three years time he would be killed quite unexpectedly by a drunk driver heading the wrong direction on the freeway on-ramp. My associate looked at me and said, "I can't believe I have to deliver this check."
Now contrast that story with one of my own. When I first got started in finance, I began as a life agent. I had met a very young couple, had connected with them, and made an appointment to discuss the need for life insurance. In the end we took out policies on both of them. A couple of years went by, and in financial terms, they had progressed rather nicely. They had purchased a second home, which was part of their plan and she was pregnant with their first child. It was a very happy time for them. But with the new mortgage and a baby on the way, they had let their insurance lapse. I made several calls to them to reinstate the insurance however they were all to no avail. Sadly, at the age of 32 and on Thanksgiving Day, Sam (not his real name) was hit head-on while on his motorcycle by an RV traveling in his lane. He was killed instantly -- he never knew what hit him. The saddest part is he and his wife had just celebrated the birth of their first child not more than 60 days before hand. Sam left his wife and son essentially penniless. She had quit her job to raise their boy and Sam, as the primary breadwinner, was no longer there. Their original plan was for her to stay home and raise their boy. However now she was juggling grief, raising their son on her own, and working two days a week to make ends meet.
To finish the story, she sold the second home to cover the costs of burying Sam and providing income so she could stay home and take care of their beloved baby. They were very fortunate in the fact that she was able to sell the home quite quickly -- that would not be the case today.
Life insurance can feel like a catch 22. For some folks they feel that if they get life insurance it means they're going to die and so they don't. But for others who understand the purpose and the need of life insurance, it saves them from a tragic financial nightmare. My associate's surviving family although grieving for the loss of their beloved husband and father, will soon have the financial resources to take care of anything they need, with proper management, for the rest of their lives. My clients on the other hand have to abandon their future plans in order to provide for their family.
None of us are planning on leaving this earth before our time. However for some of us "our time" comes much earlier in life than we would prefer. Preparing for the care of our families in this kind of tragedy is essential to the survival of the family, the fulfillment of life plans such as college educations, paying off the mortgage, and achieving other life goals that were important to the family before the unexpected death.
So I ask you, which family would you rather be in at the time of crisis? The choice is yours.

Why get life insurance?

Author: Edwin Markar

In this article, I’m going to go over the reasons behind getting life insurance, but will not get into specific types; I’m saving that for upcoming articles deliberately to not steal the shine away from the underlying reason for purchasing it.

Life insurance is primarily purchased to provide those you care about financial protection, should you pass away. Some use it to cover estate taxes or business dealings, but in this particular article, I will focus on ordinary family needs.

It’s common for people to search online for sites that can tell them how much life insurance they need. I can tell you from experience that there is no such rule of thumb (such as replacement of 10 times income) that can fit to your needs and wants. Ask yourself, if you didn’t wake up this morning, would you want your family to continue living in the same house? What is the remaining mortgage on it? Would you like to have money set aside to make sure your kids can attend the University of their choosing? Would you like to replace some of your income? Would you like to cover your burial expense, which could cost around $10,000?

Be honest with yourself when answering these questions, it will help you reach an insurance amount you are comfortable with, and nobody will, or should, judge you for it.

Who is a candidate for life insurance? Anyone who wants to sleep better at night knowing their loved ones won’t suffer financial hardship while grieving the loss of someone they cared about. It makes a bad situation more manageable, and that is the best we can do, since we can’t change reality.

You don’t have to currently have dependants in order to justify owning a life insurance policy. It is, the vast majority of the time, less costly when you get it when you are young, and the premium goes up every year that you put it off, therefore you can lock in low rates while you are young and pay the same locked in premium even as you get older.

United States District Court holds that "period of restoration" includes time waiting for insurance payment

In my last couple of posts I have written about Vermont Mut. Ins. Co. v. Petit, in which the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts discussed issues relating to recovery of lost rental value of units after a fire.

The policy provided for lost rental income "for the duration of the reasonable period of time need for [the insured] to reenter business plus any delay attributable to [the insurer's] failure to perform its duties under the policy.

The insurer argued that the restoration period should include only the time "necessary and appropriate to complete the estimates prior to beginning construction." The insureds argued that the restoration period should also include "the entirety of this litigation if payment if not made beforehand" by the insurer, arguing that the typical insureds cannot begin reconstruction until they receive payment from the insurer. The court agreed with the insureds that the period of restoration includes the time up until they receive the settlement from the insurer.

United States District Court holds that depreciation is not a discontinuing expense

In my last post I discussed the United States District Court of the District of Massachusetts case of Vermont Mut. Ins. Co. v. Petit. The case concerns the fair rental value of units that have been destroyed by fire.

Under the terms of the insurance policy at issue the fair rental value awarded to the insureds following a fire is decreased by "any expenses that do not continue while that part of [the Property] rented or held for rental is not fit to live in." Such discontinuing expenses include cleaning and maintenance fees, since the owners do not have to pay such fees after the property has been destroyed by fire.

The court held that depreciation is not a discontinuing expense. In other words, the insurance award would not be lowered by the amount of depreciation the insureds report on their tax returns.

The insurer argued that depreciation is a discontinuing expense because depreciation is an expense that affects income, as demonstrated by the insureds' tax returns.

The court disagreed. It stated that depreciation "is not a cash expense, but 'an accounting function to spread the cost of an asset over its useful life.'" It noted that depreciation would not affect the insureds' cash flow on a month-to-month basis. "Moreover, because depreciation is an accounting factor for tax purposes, including it as a discontinuing expense would lead to 'inconsistent results . . . depending solely on whether the insured took depreciation in his tax return.'"

Finally, the court noted that depreciation was effectively accelerated because it was deducted from the insureds' property damages recovery. Also deducting it from their rental income would amount to double-counting.

United States District Court holds that "fair rental value" is determined by current leases

In Vermont Mut. Ins. Co. v. Petit the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts decided how to determine fair rental value of units after a fire.

The insurer, Vermont Mutual, argued that the rental value should be based on the rent collected in the two calendar years before the fire. The insureds based their computaton on the rental contracts in effect at the time of the fire.

The court agreed with the insureds, stating that theirs is the best evidence of the "fair market value," which is "the highest price which a hypothetical willing buyer would pay to a hypothetical willing seller in an assumed free and open market."

Limitation Periods

Grewal v. Ivany, 2008 ONCA 687.

This is an interesting decision of the Court of Appeal of Ontario from last year. It addresses the issue of discoverability and when a limitation period starts running.

In Ontario, claimants normally have two years to commence an action. This however is subject to discoverability.

The injured parties were involved in a motor vehicle accident and waited three and a half years to commence an action. The motion judge dismissed the plaintiff's action as out of time.

The Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff's lack of prognosis, along with a medical notation in the family doctor's notes that the plaintiff's pain is chronic, were not enough to start the limitation period running.

Further the Court of Appeal said that there wasn't enough evidence to conclude that the plaintiff would meet the threshold or not, so he couldn't know if he should commence a claim or not. This was despite the fact that the plaintiff had admitted during cross examination that he was uncertain if his neck pain would go away at a time more than two years before he commenced the action. In other words, he knew he had pain and he knew he might not get better.

It is interesting that the threshold seems to have protected the plaintiff from the statute of limitations.

Dinosaurs mentioned in the bible

Dinosaurs Mentioned in the Bible

Here are some references from the Bible, most of which refer to dinosaurs. The word "Dinosaur" was invented in 1841, so we won't find it in the Bible, any more than we would find new scientific words like "low pressure system" to describe a coming storm in Scripture.

Dragons, Dragon and Behemoth all refer to dinosaurs. Note the very specific description of Behemoth and Leviathan.

    References to Dragons (Dinosaurs).

Deuteronomy 32:33 their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps.

Job 30:29 I am a brother to dragons, and a companion to owls.

Psalms 44:19 Though thou hast sore broken us in the place of dragons, and covered us with the shadow of death.

Psalms 74:13 Thou didst divide the sea by thy strength: thou brakest the heads of the dragons in the waters.

Psalms 91:13 Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.

Psalms 148:7 ¶ Praise the LORD from the earth, ye dragons, and all deeps:

Isaiah 13:22 And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged.

Isaiah 27:1 ¶ In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

Isaiah 34:13 And thorns shall come up in her palaces, nettles and brambles in the fortresses thereof: and it shall be an habitation of dragons, and a court for owls.

Isaiah 35:7 And the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water: in the habitation of dragons, where each lay, shall be grass with reeds and rushes.

Isaiah 43:20 The beast of the field shall honour me, the dragons and the owls: because I give waters in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert, to give drink to my people, my chosen.

Isaiah 51:9 ¶ Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the LORD; awake, as in the ancient days, in the generations of old. Art thou not it that hath cut Rahab, and wounded the dragon?

Jeremiah 9:11 And I will make Jerusalem heaps, and a den of dragons; and I will make the cities of Judah desolate, without an inhabitant.

Jeremiah 10:22 Behold, the noise of the bruit is come, and a great commotion out of the north country, to make the cities of Judah desolate, and a den of dragons.

Jeremiah 14:6 And the wild did stand in the high places, they snuffed up the wind like dragons; their eyes did fail, because there was no grass.

Jeremiah 49:33 And Hazor shall be a dwelling for dragons, and a desolation for ever: there shall no man abide there, nor any son of man dwell in it.

Jeremiah 51:34 Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon hath devoured me, he hath crushed me, he hath made me an empty vessel, he hath swallowed me up like a dragon, he hath filled his belly with my delicates, he hath cast me out.

Jeremiah 51:37 And Babylon shall become heaps, a dwellingplace for dragons, an astonishment, and an hissing, without an inhabitant.

Nehemiah 2:13 And I went out by night by the gate of the valley, even before the dragon well, and to the dung port, and viewed the walls of Jerusalem, which were broken down, and the gates thereof were consumed with fire.

Micah 1:8 ¶ Therefore I will wail and howl, I will go stripped and : I will make a wailing like the dragons, and mourning as the owls.

Malachi 1:3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

(I have excluded all the references in the Revelation since it refers Satan.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References to Behemoth (a four legged Dinosaur)

Job 40:15-24 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares. (or Will any take him in his sight, or, bore his nose with a gin?}

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References to Leviathan. (Leviathan is probably an extinct sea creature such as a KRONOSAURUS or LIOPLEURODON.)

Job 41:1-10 Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down? Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn? Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee? Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever? Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens? Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants? Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish spears? Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more. Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him? None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me?

Psalms 74:14 Thou brakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, and gavest him to be meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness.

Psalms 104:26 There go the ships: there is that leviathan, whom thou hast made to play therein.

Isaiah 27:1 In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.  

Why were the dragons above always described as being in a desolate place, far away from people? If my high school science book was wrong indeed, and people co-existed with these large fellows, would you want to live in their areas?  

For more information,  see  www.sixdaycreation.com and www.answersingenesis.org

DRIVING A RACE CAR FOR THE FIRST TIME

For my 40th birthday, I received an opportunity to drive a real race car with the Race On driving people. 

It was different than  thought it would be.  First off, you are alone in the car. Secondly you are NOT alone on the Track!! That means passing and so forth. 

You do have to follow an instructor.  You are supposed to follow 1-2 car lengths but i found that very hard to do at first. 

I do recommend this as a great gift or experience for you. 

Proof of Loss

Section 136 - "No action shall be brought for the recovery of money payable under a contract of insurance until the expiration of sixty days after proof, in accordance with the provisions of the contract,

(a) of the loss; or

(b) of the happening of the event upon which the insurance money is to become payable,
or of such shorter period as is fixed by the contract of insurance."

I would take this to mean that if a court action is started before sixty days have elapsed that the insurer may bring a motion to dismiss the action.

Is this a complete bar to a court action?

The preceding section, s. 135 of the Insurance Act, requires insurers to "furnish forms" for proof of loss to the insured. Insurers are required to send these "Proof of Loss" forms to insured claimants.

My question is this, if the insured fails to complete and return these "Proof of Loss" forms but in all other respects cooperates with the insurer and the insurer conducts a thorough investigation of the loss, can the insurer rely on the failure to complete and return the "Proof of Loss" forms as a bar to the insured's action? Or can there be "deemed" notice of proof of loss in certain circumstances? Finally, what if the "Proof of Loss" forms are completed and returned to the insurer but the insured commences her/his court action prior to waiting sixty days?

Phone Calls After Accidents

It is regrettable, but many of my clients receive phone calls after accidents they are involved in. These come from call centers presumable run by doctors and clinics. Lawyers are generally , for good reason, expressly forbidden from directly contacting an injured person (ambulance chasing). 

But, these rules do not apply to doctors and clinics. Some use official sounding terms like "Tennessee Accident Investigation Bureau" offering free therapy. (of course, they refer you to a firm).

If you have an accident where you are not at fault, you may want to turn your phone off for a while, except to call a lawyer you know and trust. 

UNINSURED MOTORISTS IN TENN

Longtime readers will know that I always recommend carrying lots of Uninsured Motorists/Underinsured Motorists (UM) Auto insurance coverage. It is a combination coverage, and both are included under the term “UM.”

Why Uninsured?

Because this is the policy that you will turn to in a hit and run, or if you are hit by a fleeing criminal.

Why Underinsured?

Because you have more money available to you in the event of a tragic accident.

Example: Woman Driving drunk plows into you from behind. You have a broken shoulder blade and a punctured lung.

• Your medical bills: $41,00.00
• Your lost wages at work: $8,900.00
• She has $25,000.00 of insurance (normal in Tennessee). If that is all you have, then the most you can receive in this example is $25,000.00

But what if you have $100,000.00 of UM?

• You would recover all of the$100,00.00 (25K form her, and 75K from your carrier.) That is why UM is so important.

It is not usually too expensive either, especially with older cars. Call your agent and make sure you and your family have plenty of this coverage. Some agents will say it is not important. They do not see what I see everyday. — David Peel

Evolution Doesn't Add Up

• The Bible has absolutely no hint of ages of evolutionary development. Forcing the "days" of Genesis 1 to mean "ages" can be done, but there is no support for that idea in the rest of Scripture (Psalm 33:6-9, 148:5-6; John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:3; Revelation 4:11; etc.). Throughout Scripture, when the word days is used, it is clear in the context how it is meant. for instance, one can say Back in the Day, it took me a Day fly across the whole state, but in my father's Day, he could not even do it during the Day... those were the Days.
By context, you know each one. In context, numbering the days indicates 24 hour days. saying morning or evening, or both, certainly indicates 24 hour days. using 7 days together to get a week, indicates 24 hour days. The text indicates a week. 168 hours. it is up to you to accept it or reject it if you wish, and I used to reject, but now I accept it. If you email me, and wish to look at it more closely, i will respond.

• Evolution, precisely macro evolution (species to other species) is not observed at all today. Empirical science is based on observation and verification. Nothing (from bacteria to people) is "evolving" into a "higher order." Period.

• Fossil data does not show any transitional forms. If evolution occurred prior to recorded history, it can only be documented by the fossils embedded in the water-deposited rocks of earth. Those "missing links" are still missing. Actually, we are not missing Links. We are missing the Chain!

• God's stated purpose for creating excludes evolution. The creation reveals the Creator (Romans 1:20, Psalm 19:1-4), gives authority to the message of Jesus Christ (John 1:1-14, Colossians 1:16-18), and is the foundation for the gospel and for worship (Revelation 14:6-7). Creating is what God does at the moment of the new birth (Ephesians 2:8-10). 

If you wish to discuss this civilly, please send me a message. 
Thanks, Dave
(thanks to ICR.org for some content).

Evolution vs. Creation- great video for all of us

GREAT Video for the kids and us 

http://kids4truth.com/watchmaker/watch.html

I think most folks can accept an All-good God; or even an All-powerful God... but not both at one time.. that's where the rub is...
Is He good but ineffective to prevent evil? or is He is powerful enough to stop it, but chooses not to and thus seems less than good? 

This is at the base of many religious questions and problems, in my opinion. The end of Psalms 92 reminds us that "He is upright and there is no wickedness in Him." 

Yet, the psalmist reminds us of his power and knowledge in Psalm 139:7-10

7 Where can I go from your Spirit? 
Where can I flee from your presence?

8 If I go up to the heavens, you are there; 
if I make my bed in the depths, [a] you are there.

9 If I rise on the wings of the dawn, 
if I settle on the far side of the sea,

10 even there your hand will guide me, 
your right hand will hold me fast.


So, we all have a choice. If you choose that God is Not all Good, YOU have become the JUDGE of the Creator God!!! Your version of good does not even always agree with your neighbor or the height to cut your grass or your wife on choice of restaurants. How does one decide what is good? That we do not hurt someone? Shag carpeting meets that definition. Surely we can go deeper. 

God is all Good and all Powerful. He loves you. This world is broken and He will heal it and can heal you. But He will never violate your free will and your choices.   There is hope in none other. Cry out to Jesus and He will show you great and wonderful things. Or, you can try it all your own.... How's that workin' out for ya? Life is short, eternity is LOOOONNNGGGGGG.. choose wisely. see John 3. 

Dave

Superior Court holds that insured not required to pay interest on recovered artwork

In two recent posts I have discussed Apthorp v. OneBeacon Ins. Co.

Another issue the court discussed with respect to damages was whether the insured was required to pay interest to the insurer. Judge Garsh held that no interest was required. The original agreement between the insurer and the insured stated that the insured would repay only the amount it received if the stolen picture was found. Judge Garsh wrote, "OneBeacon is not entitled unilaterally to rewrite the agreement that the insurer drafted to add a requirement that interest be paid to the insurer from the date of its payment for the loss."

Hudson crash survivors not receiving insurance

The New York Times has an interesting article on insurance issues facing the Hudson crash survivors. AIG, the airline's insurer, is refusing to pay the passengers' claims for medical expenses and lost property.

Although the article pulls on the heartstrings, from an insurance standpoint it makes sense that a liability insurer would not pay in the absence of negligence by the insured airline. The passengers claim that AIG is implying that they are to blame for their lost property and medical expenses; but in fact AIG is merely asserting that the airline is not at fault.

Superior Court rules that insurer is entitled to appraised value of returned painting despite uncertainty over whether it paid the insured that value

In my last post I discussed Apthorp v. OneBeacon Ins. Group, LLC.

Another issue in that case was how much the insurer should be reimbursed once the painting was found. When the painting was stolen other items owned by the insured were also stolen. The insured gave the insurer an appraisal valuing the painting at $25,000. The insured provided an estimated value of $65,000 for other stolen items, and did not provide any estimated or appraised value for other items. The insurer paid the coverage limit of $32,500.

Judge Garsh rejected the insured's argument that the insurer paid half of the value of all the items, and therefore it paid $12,500 for the painting and should be reimbursed only that amount. She wrote that the insured "ignore[s] that the schedule of items sent to the adjuster had numerous items with no estimated values, making the insured's loss greater than $65,000 if her estimates were accepted. The aggregate loss may actually have been less or more than $65,000." She held that it would be speculative to assign a dollar value to each one of the items stolen, so that an accurate percentage of the insurer's payment attributable to the painting could not be fixed. She therefore deemed that the insurer paid $25,000 for the loss of the painting.

Superior Court explains difference between "subrogate" and "assign"

Apthorp v. OneBeacon Ins. Group, LLC concerns a painting that was stolen in 1976. The owner was paid for the loss by her insurer, OneBeacon. The painting was recently found and is worth significantly more than its appraised value in 1976.

Both the insurer and the estate of the insured claimed ownership of the painting. Judge Garsh found that ownership had not been transferred to the insurer.

In the agreement between the insured and the insurer, the insured "subrogate[d] all right, title and interest" in the painting to the insurer. The insurer contended that by this language title to the painting was transferred to it.

Judge Garsh disagreed. She wrote that the insurer "erroneously equates 'subrogate' with 'assign.' Subrogation means substitution, not assignment or transfer. Conflating 'subrogation' and 'assignment' as if these words are interchangeable is inconsistent with the usual and ordinary meaning of the term 'subrogate.' The general rule is well established that upon the payment of a loss the insurer is entitled to be subrogated pro tanto to any right of action which the insured may have against a third person whose negligence or wrong caused the loss.' The Latin phrase 'pro tanto' means 'to that extent.' Subrogation refers to an insurer's succession to any right of action that the insured may have against the party or parties responsible for the loss after the insurer has paid the insured's claim."

Superior Court rules that businesses are not entitled to bring claim under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A § 9 for violation of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 176D

As I posted here, consumers can bring an action against an insurance company for violations of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A § 9 if the insurer violated Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 176D. Businesses, however, cannot. They must show that the actions of the insurance company violated Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A § 11, and a violation of 176D is not an automatic violation of § 11.

The Massachusetts Superior Court recently reaffirmed that distinction. In Watt's Water Techs.,Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., the insured businesses argued that they were entitled to bring a suit against insurers pursuant to § 9 because § 9 states "any person whose rights are affected by another person violating the provisions of clause (9) of section three of chapter one hundred seventy six D may bring an action in the superior court."

Judge Hinckle held that that language does not permit a business plaintiff to sue under § 9 for a violation of 176D.

Loss Prevention and Coffee

Many of my readers are concerned (wink) with the recent fire at a topless coffee shop here in Maine. I have been deluged by people asking me where I will now buy my coffee.

My response - As I am in risk mitigation, I always put a top on my coffee.

News Story Here

SS

Credit card trip insurance

Trip insurance refunds the price of a plane ticket in the event of sickness or death of an immediate family member. You can generally purchase it at the same time that you buy your plane tickets.

It turns out that my credit card provides the same trip insurance automatically.

The moral: Look at your cardholder benefits guide that is mailed to you every year or so. You never know what you might find.