Greenville Personal Injury Lawyer - All Topics - Latest Comments

A comment on Frivolous Lawsuits?

Michael A. Ferrara Jr. — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:27:42 GMT

I defy any "tort reformer" to give the specifics of any REAL case they find to be frivolous. Since we take a fee on any recovery, why on this good earth would anyone file a frivolous case?

A comment on Allstate Insurance Company Driven by Greed

Roger Poe — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:22:35 GMT

(b)Insurance & State Farm Insurance Supporters Mislead SE Texas Hurricane Rita Victims(/b)

State Farm and Allstate/Pilot Claim Service "adjusters" told untold thousands of hurricane Rita victims in South East Texas that blatant wind/debris damage* to asphalt shingle roofing systems was 'not really' damage to shingles, and/or 'damage our engineers do not recognize'.

(Audio documentation of an upper level State Farm "adjuster"/manager explaining their Rita "position" is available).

* 6-7 hours of wind borne debris being thrown at 90-100MPH+ against the outer [granule/bitumen] component of shingles, (which abrasive action can grind down the outer layer all the way down to the inner fiberglass mat), is wind damage State Farm and Allstate do NOT "recognize".

Too, wind broke/lifted tar sealant bonds on shingles. Debris then shimmed up the shingles, and debris also stuck to the tar sealant bonds, making it impossible for the shingles to reseal, and leaving the home and inhabitants vulnerable to further harm.

Again, State Farm and Allstate claimed that that those types of fiberglass shingle roofing system breakage 'is not damaged that they recognized'.

(As a side note, many of their loss claim "offers" (forgot) to include a basic sub-trade contractor overhead and profit valued line item of 29%, and many other claim estimates (forgot) to include a basic 49% primary/general contractor overhead and profit loss value).

In other words, according to the Texas Department of Insurance,** both Allstate and State Farm are collecting in real dollars Subcontractor and Primary-General Contractor overhead and profit loss values from the general public, but are keeping that money since most people don't realize it is part of the value of their loss they have pre-paid for every month in Replacement Cost policies/premiums.

..And their "adjusters" comply with such practices.

It also makes one wonder how the accountants juggle those windfalls?

** See Texas Department of Insurance Bulletin B0045-98 which describes primary/general contractor ovehead and profit values as being (financially/necessarily) factored into replacement costs of structures, and is pre-paid for by the general public, and IS TO BE DISCLOSED to claimants as part of the ACTUAL value of a [structural] "loss" dollars wise.

(b)Not doing so can create ILLEGAL windfall/profit.(/b)

Collecting money from consumers for anticipated potential full loss/replacement costs of a structure, which premium dollar costs include the need for a primary/general contractor to replace the structure, and then leaving out/NOT DISCLOSING BASIC 20-49+ contractor overhead and profit costs in "financially adjusted indemnificaion loss values", ALREADY ANTICIPATED, CHARGED FOR, AND COLLECTED, is theft of premiums, no?

(i)Dismissing/misrepresenting blatant roofing system wind damage, that is physically and factually nothing less than that, (and, oddly, previously recognized by Allstate & State Farm in other storms in the coastal states), to untold thousands of hurricane Rita victims in South East Texas/elsewhere, is intentional unfair trade practice, deceptive trade practice, and theft of premiums too, no?(/i)

rogerpoegc@gmail.com

A comment on Allstate Insurance Company Driven by Greed

craig — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 09:26:21 GMT

Very well written, but very off base. Sounds like you are a bitter man who had a bad experience with an insurance company

A comment on Workers Compensation Deform in South Carolina

Fred Palmer — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 08:30:07 GMT

Hello from Canada,

The workers comp systems in both the U.S. and Canada have consistently eroded the rights of injured workers since the inception of the WC system. An injured worker has no rights, is abused in every possible way, and most times is left in a state of pain and unrelenting poverty. For the permanently injured, the system is a nighmare. At the same time, companies are enjoying the most profitable years ever. This abuse caused by greed must be stopped on both sides of the border if we are to have a truly just system. No one should be dying because medications are cut off, operations are withheld, and, neither should someone be forced to live in the street because of a workplace injury. Unfortunately this happens way too often.

It is a sad state of affairs when one section of society (injured workers) is subjected to corporate fascism, rather than the democratic, free, and equal society we should all be enjoying. What our respective governments are doing amounts to human rights abuses.

A comment on Judge Sets Reduced Award in Vioxx Case

Francis — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 11:37:32 GMT

Gee, John, you challenge the author and talk about "real" information, yet you don't offer any so-called "real" information yourself. I am wondering what was even the point of your comment. The only fact that needs to be known is that Vioxx was a dangerous drug that should have never been on the market.

A comment on Judge Sets Reduced Award in Vioxx Case

John — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:24:43 GMT

I feel that this article reflects a very slanted view of the overall VIOXX situation.

Instead of presenting facts and details as a true journalist, the author has chosen to draw the readership toward a clearly biased view that is peppered with inaccurate and illogical conclusions. I specifically reference the comments related to the adequacy of product testing and the ascertain regarding Merck's legal strategy - both of which are false.

I believe that the readership will feel insulted by this form of 'journalism' and consequently will give this article (and others like) it the appropriate level of consideration. I encourage the readers to assemble the facts and draw their own conclusions as compared to being force fed the author's viewpoints.

Armed with 'real' information, you will be able to better understand the overall situation.