By Mark Goldwich
If you are current on my
blogs, you know we have been talking about the various ways insurance companies
are able to create and take advantage of delays – to their financial gain, and
your financial loss. It’s not easy, but these delaying efforts can be overcome.
Even if you endure all the
delays, and even if you somehow work your way through the labyrinth of denials,
the insurance industry may well have one more coincidence up its sleeve. This
coincidence catches a lot of insurance consumers by surprise. It often
contributes to the exasperated, exhausted homeowner’s conclusion that it’s
better to give up, settle for what they can get, and perhaps accept dimes,
nickels, or even pennies on the dollars they are actually owed.
The coincidence is known
as deflection, and it’s what happens when the insurance company finds reasons
to avoid paying you money that you actually have coming on your claim. Although
listed last in this blog series (after delays and denials), deflections can be
encountered at any time during the claim.
In this blog, I’ll give
you a broad overview of the “deflection game”; in the chapters that follow,
we’ll look at how the game is actually played to the detriment of you, the
policyholder.
Like the coincidences
mentioned in previous chapters, this one requires the help of a professional if
you want to stand the barest chance of getting all you are owed. All too often,
though, this is a game that non-professionals lose … simply because they don’t realize they’re playing in the first
place.
Q&A:
What you should know
What,
exactly, does the “deflection game” involve?
It involves the insurance company finding ways to avoid giving a
direct, truthful answer to what would seem to be a fairly basic question: “Who has
the moral and legal responsibility to make sure that my legitimate claim is
paid in full, promptly and to my complete satisfaction?”
Isn’t
that obvious? Doesn’t the insurance company itself have the obligation to pay
the claim? That answer may perhaps seem obvious to the policyholder, but
sometimes it’s not all that obvious to an insurance company with a
multitude of adjusters, engineers, restoration companies, attorneys, insurers,
re-insurers, and third-party administrators at its disposal. There are so many
cases of insurance companies dodging this issue that I can’t really do justice
to the topic in a blog of this size. I can say, though, that it seems the legal
system has finally begun to catch up with a few of the worst offenders.
What
kinds of cases are we talking about? In Ohio,
a jury held that a life insurance and disability management services company
was guilty of breach of insurance contract; the jury awarded the plaintiffs
$429,400 in compensatory damages for nonpayment of claims. But that wasn’t all.
The jury also found the insurance company guilty of bad faith insurance practices,
and mandated an award of $1,130,000 to the plaintiffs.
They
coupled this with a whopping punitive damages award of $3 million. Documents
from the case give some sense of the elaborate lengths to which some companies
will go to avoid paying people the money they are owed. This particular
insurance company used a third party administrator, and an affiliate re-insurer
(which was also a 40% owner of the third party administrator) to combine their
efforts in an illegal scheme to avoid
paying completely legitimate claims.
The scheme involved a
whole host of complex accounting maneuvers, as well as false information that
was submitted to an insurance commission. Now, I realize that, at this point,
you may be having some difficulty getting your head around all this. That’s
because a) such cases are pretty complicated and b) you’re probably still
thinking of insurance companies as responsible businesses with an obligation to
take care of their customers over the long term. All too often, it seems they’re simply not very responsible, and not
thinking about the interests of their customers in any time frame, short or
long.
Are there
other cases like that Ohio case mentioned?
Plenty. Many have a disturbing, and all-too-common, theme – the
insurance company says that paying you
is actually someone else’s responsibility.
But the “someone else”
either never follows through or only partially follows through on its
obligation to you. Or they say that the other party’s report or advice
“prevents” them from paying you (as if they can’t override the opinion of an
outside party). I’ve personally seen this happen many, many times.
Do all of
these cases wind up in court? No. In my
opinion, very few of the cases that could go to court ever get there, and most
policyholders in these situations do not get the impartial hearing they
deserve.
Why
not? Because many individual policyholders simply can’t tolerate the
idea of wandering into another bureaucratic maze with no clear outcome that
they can see benefiting them in the near future. (As we all know, going to
court can be a long, expensive process.) After all the delays, and after all
the denials, many people are simply sick of the process of trying to get the
insurance company to pay up. They either take whatever crumbs they’ve already
been tossed, settle prior to trial, give up altogether, or even die (yes, we’ve seen claim
victims pass away before seeing the claim check arrive).
As I’ve suggested
elsewhere in my blogs, I suspect a fair number of people suffer one of these outcomes.
We’ll dive deeper into deflection next time.
Mark Goldwich is president of Gold Star Adjusters, a group of public insurance adjusters dedicated to helping citizens get the maximum settlement for any insurance claim.
As they say you need to look before you leap. Thanks for the head's up.
ReplyDeleteGood to know! Nobody likes to take responsibility when it involves paying up!!
ReplyDeleteHmmm. I once had a (now ex) girlfriend who was good at the deflection game as well. I recognize its characteristics, alas.
ReplyDelete