Insurance Bad Faith « LAW BLOG: Murphy & Murphy Law Offices Nevada Personal Injury Lawyers

Archive for the ‘Insurance Bad Faith’ Category

Las Vegas Accident Attorney and Injury Trial Lawyer Tips: Always Ask for a Lawyer’s Experience and Track Record

Friday, July 16th, 2010

Las Vegas accident attorney and injury trial lawyer Craig Murphy here with more practical tips for someone needing to hire a Las Vegas accident and injury lawyer. I recently came across a press release posted on the Internet by a Las Vegas attorney. The Las Vegas attorney’s press release made a number of statements that I found somewhat hard to believe. The Las Vegas attorney claimed to be ”the most respected accident attorney” in Las Vegas and Henderson, Nevada. That is a pretty big claim. It may be true. However, I have never heard of the attorney. During my many years as an insurance defense attorney in Las Vegas, I never had a case against the attorney. During my many years now representing accident and injury victims in Las Vegas, I have never had any dealings with the attorney and have never read that the attorney has taken any case to trial and obtained favorable jury verdicts. Based on that, I think that the attorney’s claim to be “the most respected accident attorney” in Las Vegas and Henderson, Nevada is somewhat questionable.

My point is that anyone can say whatever they want on their web site, in a press release, or in their firm literature advertising their law firm. How can a Las Vegas accident or injury victim tell what is true and correct as opposed to a bunch of hype? Ask for the attorney’s experience on cases like yours. Ask for the attorney’s track record of getting jury verdicts and substantial settlements on cases like yours. In addition to reviewing the Las Vegas attorney’s experience and track record, meet with a number of attorneys in Las Vegas. Don’t just tell them about your case. Interview the attorneys. Ask about their policies and procedures. Find out how the Las Vegas attorney will communicate with you. Find out who will primarily be handling your case. If you are considering hiring a TV lawyer, you must know that the TV lawyer will not be handling your case personally. The Las Vegas TV lawyers have too big of a case load to handle your case personally. Your case will be handled by a case worker or an associate attorney in the office. Find out who. Find out who you should talk to if you have questions. Find out who your contact person is.

Once you have received the answers to these and other questions that you have, you should see the value in hiring a lawyer who will personally handle your case. You do not want to be shuffled around to a bunch of different case workers. Also, you want to be confident in knowing that the lawyer and law firm have a solid track record, experience, and success. You do not want someone learning on your case, do you? On the job training is not for a serious Las Vegas injury case. If you have been injured in a Las Vegas accident and you need to hire a Las Vegas attorney for your injuries, hire the skilled and experienced Las Vegas trial lawyers at Murphy & Murphy Law Offices. You will get close personal attention to your case. You will also be hiring a firm with a proven track record of success.

Posted in 18-Wheeler Crashes, Auto Accidents, Brain & Spinal Cord Injuries, Impaired-Distracted Drivers, Insurance Bad Faith, Medical Malpractice, Motorcycle Crashes, The Truth About Lawyer Advertising, Trips/Slips/Falls, Uncategorized, Wrongful Death | 2 Comments »

Will You be The Next Victim of Tort Reform?

Monday, June 14th, 2010

Las Vegas accident attorney and injury trial lawyer Craig Murphy asks whether you will be the next victim of tort reform. That question presupposes that tort reform causes harm and that it has victims. But isn’t tort reform supposed to protect us all? No is the simple answer to that question. Tort reform quite simply is an initiative by big businesses to protect their profits at the expense of the little guys, you and me. How can that be you ask? Tort reform seeks as its goal to take your rights away and create protections for businesses who wrongfully and negligently harm people. The businesses want to become favored and protected classes. By doing that the businesses take away your constitutional rights. Not only do they take away your constitutional right to a jury trial and for the jury to determine the amount of your injuries and damages, tort reform can leave you with insufficient protection if you are able to get to trial.

Lets look at the current situation in the Gulf of Mexico. The BP oil spill disaster continues unabated. Millions of barrels of oil a day continue to spew into the Gulf. According to BP’s latest estimates, it could take another month before it is able to stop the oil from continuing to spew into the Gulf. In Louisiana alone businesses and entire industries are facing the complete devastation. The financial damages to the tourism industry and the fishing industry cannot even be calculated. Estimates are in the hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more. However, due to the lobbying efforts of the oil companies and other powerful interests, Federal law limits BP’s responsibilities for damages to $75 Million. Federal law caps BP’s financial responsibility to those whose lives and livelihoods have been taken from them. There is no obligation for full and complete compensation. There is no requirement for fair compensation. The compensation is capped. So everyone who has been damaged and all those who may be damaged as the oil spreads to other states and perhaps spreads to the east coast of America will all have to share in the $75 Million.

How is it fair that BP’s damages can be capped? It isn’t. Plain and simple. The people who are damaged the most are the ones who can least afford to be without compensation. BP on the other hand will be protected. Its profits protected. The injured people and small businesses are the ones who are left with no protection and no way to recover what has been lost.

Caps on damages like those protecting BP are in effect in Las Vegas. You may become the next victim of tort reform. Nevada law imposes strict damage limits in medical malpractice cases. No matter how badly a person is injured by the negligence of a doctor, the damages are capped at $350,000 for non-economic damages. What does that mean, if a person is paralyzed and confined to a wheelchair for life, the most a negligent doctor would have to pay for all the pain inflicted, all the mental anguish suffered, all of the enjoyment of life taken away, could not exceed $350,000. If a jury awarded more, the judge, by law, would have to reduce the damages to $350,000. Who wold be willing to be paralyzed for $350,000? No one. Beyond that, suppose a family ember died as the result of medical negligence. Say a young stay at home mom. Would anyone dispute that her life would be worth more than $350,000 to her family? I do not think so. However, that would be all the family would be entitled to receive.

No one thinks of the potential consequences when a proposal to limit the constitutional rights of individuals is being presented by multi-million dollar ad campaigns. National organizations, business alliances, and insurance companies lobby and press politicians everyday to impose strict liability limits to protect them from having to pay damages to people who have been injured due to their negligence. It is nothing more than a scheme to protect and guarantee their profits. More than that it is a means to give them free reign and a license to practice their business in any manner its sees fit without regard to the consequences because they are protected by caps on the damages they have to pay when their practices are negligent and cause injury and damage. Look a BP. What incentive did it have to be safer? What plans did it have if something were to go wrong? BP can know that its liability for damages is capped at $75 Million. It can pay its corporate dividends. It can fund a $50 Million ad campaign to try and save its corporate image. Think about that for a minute. BP is willing to pay almost as much for its public image ad campaign as it will be required to pay for damages due to the protections afforded to it under federal law. How can that be right? How can that be fair? Unfortunately it is the little people all around the Gulf of Mexico and perhaps beyond that will really have to pay the price when BP escapes its full responsibility.

Corporate Irresponsibility Taken to New Heights. Are You Going to be The Next Victim?

Thursday, June 10th, 2010

We are entering an era where corporate irresponsibility will be taken to new heights. As Emeril says “to notches previously unknown.” How can this happen? The thought that has been superimposed upon the general public is that businesses are failing because of frivolous lawsuits. Frivolous lawsuits are ruining the country. Unfortunately, that translates into the belief that all lawsuits are frivolous. There is a distrust of anyone who brings a lawsuit for injuries and damages these days. The injured person is no longer viewed as an unfortunate victim of negligence. The injured victim is seen as a money grubbing person out to strike it rich. Instead, in today’s society, it is the negligent business that is viewed as the victim. The unfortunate business that has to endure a lawsuit by a personal injury trial lawyer.

That pervasive attitude is the result of a long-running and ongoing multi-billion dollar campaign by insurance companies and big business. The goal is to crush the rights of the little guy. To close the courthouse doors to the common everyday person. Another goal is to generate larger corporate profits. Not only by eliminating lawsuits for the corporation’s negligence, but to also allow the corporation conduct business in an unfettered manner. No more worries about corporate responsibility getting in the way. Take whatever course of action it chooses and the corporation can generate larger profits and not have to worry about the victims it leaves in its wake. Examples that are just starting to come to light are in the housing lending schemes and the Wall Street bailouts. We see examples in the newspapers every month on examples from China where unsafe and harmful products are placed on the market because of a complete failure of any regulation or standards. Merely a profit motive is operating as the only anchor. We have entire housing projects that are contaminated with unsafe and hazardous Chinese drywall. McDonald’s Corporation just had to recall all of the promotional drinking glasses it was giving away because they were made with a deadly chemical. At the present time we see a disaster of unknown proportions unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico as oil continues to spew into the Gulf. Time will only tell whether BP and the other responsible corporations will meet their responsibilities or whether they will seek to avoid their responsibilities through claim denials and years and years of litigation.

On a smaller scale, here is another example. A life insurance company receives a claim under a life insurance policy. The life insurance company informs the beneficiary of the life insurance policy that it is going to conduct an investigation. The beneficiary cooperates fully by providing all documents and records requested. The beneficiary gives a recorded statement. The beneficiary completes questionnaires and forms. The claim is accepted. The beneficiary receives a check for the payment of the life insurance policy.

Nine months later the beneficiary receives a letter saying that the life insurance company made a mistake. No specific mistake is stated or indicated. There is no allegation of fraud or that the beneficiary did not cooperate or gave false information. The letter just says the company made a mistake. Because the life insurance company allegedly mader some mistake, the life insurance company demanded that the beneficiary send the money from the life insurance policy back to the company.

What if the money is gone? What if the money has been spent? What if the money has been invested? How and why should the beneficiary have to pay it back? The life insurance company gave it to the beneficiary. It said, here it is, it is yours. Where is the corporate responsibility? If the life insurance company made a mistake shouldn’t it have to live with it? Shouldn’t the life insurance company have to accept the negligence of its employees’ actions. Instead of accepting the fact that it paid the money, wrongly or rightly, the insurance company refuses to accept responsibility. Isn’t the real answer the same thing we would teach our children? Accept the consequences of your actions. Grow up and learn to be a responsible citizen. It is time for us and our corporations to learn and live by the lessons we teach our children. Start taking responsibility for your actions. Fess up and pay up when you are wrong. Your mom, or in the case of corporations, your PR Firm and multi-million dollar ad campaign will not always be there to bail you out of the messes you create. Accept responsibility and make it right. Then learn a lesson from the mistake and don’t do it again.

Posted in Insurance Bad Faith, Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

Are You a Victim of Insurance Bad Faith?

Tuesday, May 18th, 2010

Are you a victim of insurance bad faith? How would you know or find out? First you must know what “insurance bad faith” is in Nevada. “Insurance bad faith” is defined by law. Some states have statutes or laws that define and govern what constitutes “insurance bad faith.” Other states, such as Nevada, do not have statutes or laws that define what constitutes “insurance bad faith.” Instead, case law has developed that establishes what practices, actions, and failures by an insurance company constitute “insurance bad faith.” Case law in Nevada establishes that an insurance company, under the insurance policy or contract, has an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Violation of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing gives rise to a “bad faith” claim against the insurance company. The courts in Nevada have defined “insurance bad faith” as an actual or implied awareness of the absence of a reasonable basis for denying the benefits of the insurance policy.

Based upon Nevada case law, not every denial of an insurance claim is in “bad faith.” A denial of an insurance claim only rises to the level of “bad faith” when the insurance company does not have an actual or implied awareness of the absence of a reasonable basis for denying the claim. What does that mean to you? It means that if the insurance company can point to an actual reason for the denial of your claim, it has not acted in ”bad faith.” That is understandable. If there is no basis for your claim under the terms of the insurance policy, for example, there is no “bad faith” on the part of the insurance company in denying your claim. That is why it is so absolutely important that you know the terms and conditions of your insurance policies. As I previously explained in another blog post, the exclusions and restrictions in some policies severely limit the insurance company’s obligations to you. Often the coverage is so narrowly construed that the coverage may be of little or no actual benefit to you. Nevertheless, you pay an extra premium for the coverage.

“Insurance bad faith” also means that the insurance company was aware that there was no reasonable basis for the denial of your claim. That is the tricky part. In almost every “insurance bad faith” claim, the insurance company will argue that it had a reasonable basis for the denial of your claim. Even if you institute a lawsuit against the insurance company and it later pays your claim, the insurance company will argue that it had a reasonable basis for the denial of your claim.

“Insurance bad faith” litigation is a very specialized area of law. If you believe that your claim has been unreasonably denied, you must speak with an experienced “insurance bad faith” lawyer. You cannot afford to hire a generalist or “jack of all trades” attorney for an “insurance bad faith” case. The attorney you hire must have experience and a track record in “insurance bad faith” cases. Take your time and be selective in who you choose to hire. Hiring an attorney or law firm that is inexperienced in “insurance bad faith” will cost you. You run the risk that the attorney or law firm will not have the expertise to establish the required elements of an “insurance bad faith” claim and your case will be dismissed or settled for pennies on the dollar. This is actually good advice for any type of claim or legal matter. Hire an attorney whose practice is limited to the type of law involving your need for legal assistance. Do not hire a divorce lawyer for a personal injury claim. Do not hire a personal injury lawyer for a criminal matter. Would you hire an ear, nose and throat doctor to perform heart surgery? Of course not. You would hire a heart specialist. That is how you should treat legal matters. Not every lawyer is right for every legal matter. Choosing the right lawyer for an insurance claim or personal injury matter is one of the most important, if not the most important, decisions that you will make. Make sure that you take the necessary steps to hire the right lawyer for your legal needs.

Posted in Insurance Bad Faith | No Comments »

“Las Vegas Injury Lawyer” tips: Do you know what your insurance policy says? It could cost you if you don’t.

Monday, May 17th, 2010

“Las Vegas injury lawyer” and “trial attorney”, Craig Murphy here with important tips for you to consider. What your insurance policy says or does not say could end up costing you a lot of money. Many companies are now placing very strict restrictions and exemptions into the language of their insurance policies. The restrictions and exclusions often run contrary to the type of insurance coverage being purchased. The restrictions and exclusions narrow the coverage to such extents that the coverage is virtually worthless in most instances. It is nothing more than a profit center for the insurance companies because they know that with the restrictions and exclusions they will virtually never have to pay. As a result, all the money that the insurance companies take in is pure profit. That profit comes at your expense and the insurance companies have little or no intent of ever having to pay the majority of the money back to policy holders.

What are some examples? Uninsured and Under Insured Motorist (UM/UIM) coverage. Most people expect that when they purchase UM/UIM coverage that the insurance will pay them if they are involved in an accident and the person who caused the accident does not have any or enough insurance to cover their injuries. In such a situation, the UM/UIM coverage would become responsible to pay the policy holder for his or her injuries. That is how it has always worked. However, insurance companies are now restricting and excluding certain situations and circumstances from coverage. Under the restricted policies, the policy holder may only be eligible for coverage if the accident happens in their car, not while they are in someone elses car. Yet, most people who purchase UM/UIM coverage expect to be covered when they are hit by someone who is uninsured or does not have enough insurance, whether it is while they are in their own car, someone elses car or even when they are walking.

The question I have is whether the insurance sales persons are explaining these restrictions and exclusions. If the insurance policy is purchased over the Internet in order to get a discount, then no one has explained the restriction or exclusion. It is buyer beware. You are on your own and you are expected to know what the policy covers and what it does not cover. It really does not matter what your expectations were. The policy language controls what will be paid and when.

What can you do to protect yourself? What should you do to protect yourself? Get your insurance policies reviewed by someone who knows how to read and interpret insurance policies. Call me. I will schedule an appointment with you and review your insurance with you at no charge. I will explain the coverages you have and the restrictions and exclusions. You can then decide if you need to change companies or drop the insurance coverage.

Posted in Auto Accidents, Insurance Bad Faith | 1 Comment »

Insurance Companies and Giant Corporations up to Their Old Tricks

Monday, May 3rd, 2010

By now everyone should be aware of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The oil spill is going to affect the people, environment and animals of the Gulf Coast for years to come. Many people will have their livelihoods affected or lost as a result. In light of the oncoming oils spill, British Petroleum held a “town hall” meeting supposedly to give public information. Most residents thought the “town hall” meeting was to inform them of what to expect and what British Petroleum was going to do. Instead, company executives used the meeting as an attempt to extract quick and easy settlements. According to a news article, the company executives used the meeting in an attempt to gain an unfair legal advantage over the local citizens and business owners. Local government officials reportedly stopped the meeting as a result. The government officials advised the attendees not to sign any papers from the oil company. Attorneys familiar with the Exxon Valdez incident reported similar tactics.

Insurance companies often use the same tactic with car crash victims. Once you are in a car crash, you will receive a call from the insurance adjuster for the person who ran into you. You will be asked to give a recorded statement. You are under no obligation to give a recorded statement and you should not agree to give one. You are being contacted at this early time before you know the extent of your injuries. You will be asked questions that later will be used against you. While you answered the questions honestly, you are not trained and skilled like the insurance adjuster. You will be asked the same question in numerous variations so that they can get the information from you in a manner that works against you. You may say that you are a little sore but that you think you are alright. If you do not get better and, in fact, get worse, your statement will be used against you. You will be accused of exaggerating your claim. You will be offered a minimal settlement before you receive any medical treatment and before you know if you have any injuries. Hopefully you do not. However, if you do and you sign an agreement with the insurance company, you will not be able to receive any further compensation for your medical treatment and your injuries. As a result, you should be careful. There is no hurry for you to settle with the insurance company right away. A quick settlement only helps the insurance company. Wait until you know that you are better; that you do not have any permanent injuries. Once you know that, you can settle with the insurance company. In Nevada you have two years from the date of the collision to settle your case or file a law suit. Make sure you know the facts before you settle.

Posted in Auto Accidents, Insurance Bad Faith | 1 Comment »

“Las Vegas Insurance Bad Faith” What Does It Mean?

Monday, April 26th, 2010

“Insurance bad faith” what does it really mean? ”Insurance bad faith” happens when an insurance company fails to meet its contractual obligation to you, its insured. However, just failing to meet its obligations in your or my opinion does not in and of itself constitute “insurance bad faith.” More is required. Nevada law is specific about what is required to establish an insurance company has acted in bad faith or committed bad faith in its practices relating to your claim. Before getting to the legal requirements, you may have questions about whether your insurance company has acted in bad faith and you are a victim of insurance bad faith practices. You have a contract with your insurance company. To keep your policy active and valid, you must pay your insurance premiums. If you have a claim or potential claim, you must follow the reporting requirements placed on you by the insurance contract. If the insurance company wants to investigate your claim, you must comply with its reasonable requests. You are contractually obligated to cooperate with the insurance company in its investigation of your claim. If you do not cooperate, that provides the insurance company a basis to deny your claim, even if your claim was valid and legitimate. Providing false information is another basis the insurance company can deny your claim. In addition, the insurance company could report you to the authorities for fraud if you provide false or inaccurate information in the submission of your claim.

Your insurance company has an obligation to provide information to you. It must comply with Nevada law in the manner in which it investigates, evaluates and pays your claim. By failing to comply with Nevada law, your insurance company can commit “bad faith insurance practices.” Bad faith insurance practices can then subject the insurance company to specific damages that you have suffered and to the potential of punitive damages. Punitive damages are damages awarded to stop such behavior by the insurance company in the future and to serve as a warning to other insurance companies.

The insurance company should not place its interests over yours. The Nevada courts do not require or impose a fiduciary relationship and duty on the insurance company. However, it should give equal weight to your interests as it does to its own interests. The insurance company must conduct a fair investigation into your claim. The denial of your claim must be based upon sufficient reasons. The denial of your claim should not be based upon speculation. The insurance company has a duty to assist you in the filing and presentation of your claim. It should not make the claims process adversarial and improperly or intentionally mislead you or keep important information away from you. The insurance company should not destroy documents or records in your file or relating to your claim. It should make timely efforts to investigate and resolve your claim.

Despite these obligations and others, not all insurance companies strive for these results. Often you will find that once you present your claim, you are forced into an adversarial and confrontational relationship with the insurance adjuster assigned to your claim. Many times, the adjuster does not act like he or she wants to help you. Instead, they make the claims process as hard and difficult for you as it seems that they can. After going through the claims process for many months, you receive an offer for your claim that is very low. You consider the offer to be unrealistic but the adjuster will not reconsider the offer.

Your only option at that point in time may be to accept the low offer or to speak with a “Nevada insurance bad faith” attorney. In most instances you will not be charged any type of consultation fee. If it is determined you have a valid case, the attorney will usually take the case on a contingency basis. As a result, you will not have to pay for the lawyer on an hourly basis to represent you as the case goes along. Instead, the lawyer will take a percentage of the settlement or jury verdict obtained in the case.

Call me if you have any questions about how your insurance company has investigated and evaluated your insurance claim.

Posted in Insurance Bad Faith | 1 Comment »

Las Vegas Insurance Bad Faith Increasing

Saturday, February 20th, 2010

Is insurance bad faith increasing in Las Vegas? Are insurance companies intentionally committing bad faith insurance practices in Las Vegas? Good questions. To answer them, one must look at the evidence. Due to the economy or other business considerations insurance companies have drastically reduced the amounts of money they are willing to pay on injury claims. I have seen it in my practice. I have heard it from other Las Vegas attorneys. And, I have heard it from attorneys from around the United States.

It appears that many insurance companies have decided to reduce the amount of money they will offer to settle injury claims. In many cases, despite clear liability, well documented injuries and treatment, and documented wage losses, the insurance companies refuse to offer adequate compensation. In many instances, amounts below the medical expenses incurred by the injured person.

What does the fact that insurance companies are refusing to offer adequate compensation mean to you? It depends upon your circumstances. If you are the injured person, it means that you will have to file a lawsuit in order to receive adequate compensation for your medical expenses, lost wages, and perhaps pain and suffering. That means you will have to hire a lawyer. It further means that you should do your homework before you hire a lawyer. You cannot rely on the “I’ll get you a settlement and keep you out of court” type of lawyer to protect your interests. If you do, you will get a pennies on the dollar settlement. The lawyer and the doctors will get all of the money and you will come away with virtually nothing for your time, effort, troubles, aggravation, injuries, treatment, stress, loss of income, and I can go on and on. It means you will have to get involved in a lawsuit that could take anywhere from 6 months to more than two years to get resolved. The insurance companies know that all the while they will get to keep money that is rightfully yours in their bank accounts and draw interest on it so that by the time the case is over, they may come out virtually even.

If the insurance company is your company and you hit someone, the insurance companies may also be placing you at risk. If an offer is made to settle the claim against you and your insurance company refuses to settle the claim, you could become personally responsible for any amount of a jury verdict that is in excess of your insurance policy. For example, if you have a minimal policy in Nevada ($15,000/30,000) and your company refuses to settle a policy limit settlement offer, and the value of the claim is well above the minimal policy limits, you may become responsible for the payment of any amount awarded by a jury above your policy. In such a situation, you insurance company may decide to pay the entire verdict amount. If it does not, you then may have a bad faith case against your own insurance company for subjecting you to the adverse jury verdict.

Another situation that is creating a number of bad faith insurance practice claims is in the area of uninsured/under insured motorist coverage. Your company should evaluate your claim for uninsured/under insured motorist coverage in a manner so that your interests are at least equal with the interests of the company. However, many insurance companies are adjusting your claim in the same manner it adjusts third-party claims. In other words, in the same manner it adjusts claims with parties it has no contract with and no obligation to treat fairly. If your company refuses to fairly adjust your claim, it is acting in bad faith.

While the insurance companies may be holding onto their money in the short term, the question is whether they are making wise financial policy decisions in the long term. In a bad faith insurance case, not only will an insurance company have to pay the actual damages it has caused or for its breach of contract, the insurance company may be subjected to punitive damages. In some instances the amount of punitive damages could be significant. If the insurance carriers are held responsible for the payment of numerous punitive damage verdicts in the future, their short sighted goal of holding onto as much money as possible at your expense may cost them in the long run.

Posted in Insurance Bad Faith | 3 Comments »