Are You Up Against One of the Top Ten Worst Insurance Companies in America? Find Out from this San Diego, CA Personal Injury Attorney

Ever wonder how your insurance company stacks up against others? Ever wonder how the insurance company for the other driver or property owner will act following an auto accident or slip and fall accident? Will they treat you fair or will they lowball you and play hardball?

In a free report issued by the American Association for Justice (AAJ) entitled, “The Top Ten Worst Insurance Companies in America”, the AAJ reveals how insurance companies put profits over people and policyholders. As the report reads, the insurance companies’ strategy is to “deny, delay, defend–do anything, in fact, to avoid paying claims.”

According to the report, the worst insurance companies in America are:

  1. Allstate
  2. Unum
  3. AIG
  4. State Farm
  5. Conseco
  6. WellPoint
  7. Farmers
  8. UnitedHealth
  9. Torchmark
  10. Liberty Mutual

These insurance companies insure and compensate for auto accidents, slip and fall accidents, life insurance claims, and health insurance claims. Allstate was named the worst insurance company in America–again–in a dubious honor that seems to repeat each and every single year. According to the report, Allstate heads the list because of “a combination of lowball offers and hardball litigation.” It is even reported that insurance adjustors are instructed by their supervisors to deceive claimants by lying.

If you are insured by one of these companies you should consider switching to a more reputable insurance carrier. If you have been injured due to someone else’s negligence and find one of these companies as the insurance company for the negligent person or company, hiring the best California personal injury attorney you can find may be your best strategy.

San Diego Injury Accident Lawyer Tells of Questionable Insurance Tactics that Harm People

An honest and efficient insurance industry is essential for people to manage risks and make sure that valid injury claims from serious accidents are paid quickly. Without a quick and legitimate way of receiving compensation, people do not receive the compensation they deserve when they need it.

Unfortunately, the insurance industry regularly uses questionable tactics to keep from paying legitimate claims. San Diego injury accident lawyer tells of the tactics used by the insurance industry in this news report.

Insurance Companies Try to Increase Profits Through Questionable Tactics

Posted on Dec 20, 2009

A new free report from the American Association for Justice (AAJ), “Tricks of the Trade:  How Insurance Companies Deny, Delay, Confuse and Refuse”, tells how the insurance industry is increasingly using questionable tactics to increase their bottom lines at the expense of injured people and claimants.  This only harms the public who relies on an honest and efficient insurance system to compensate them for serious accidents.

The Report identifies the following common insurance company tricks:

  1. Denying Claims:  This is the most common tactic and is regularly employed by all insurance companies, including Allstate, State Farm, and USAA.  By denying valid claims, the insurance companies boost their profits because those are monies that will not be paid out.  Insurance companies have even been known to incentivize their employees to deny valid claims.
  2. Delaying until Death:  Insurance companies regularly delay claims in the hope that the claimant will die before the claim is paid or hoping that the injured person will give up or settle for less.  Many people do just that rather than stay the course.
  3. Confusing People:  You are not alone if you have ever been confused after reading your insurance contract.  They even confuse lawyers.  Insurance companies regularly use confusing agreements and language to discourage consumers.
  4. Discriminating by Credit Score:  Insurance companies determine premiums and insurance approvals based upon credit scores.  Lower scores pay higher premiums.
  5. Abandoning the Sick:  Insurance policy holders who are the most need of medical care are often targeted by the insurance companies and have their benefits cancelled to lower the amount of money paid out for health care.
  6. Cancelling for a Call:  Some people will call their insurance company to get a feel how filing a claim will affect their insurance coverage.  If the effect is too negative, they won’t file a claim.  However, just by making the call, the insured has essentially made a claim as far as the insurance company is concerned.  At renewal, the insurance company can use these phone inquiries to deny claims.

The Worst Insurance Companies

Which are the Top Ten Worst Insurance Companies in America and Are You Insured by One of Them? Read this Article to Find Out!

Ever wonder how your insurance company stacks up against others? Ever wonder how the insurance company for the other driver or property owner will act following an auto accident or slip and fall accident? Will they treat you fair or will they lowball you and play hardball?

In a free report issued by the American Association for Justice (AAJ) entitled, “The Top Ten Worst Insurance Companies in America”, the AAJ reveals how insurance companies put profits over people and policyholders. As the report reads, the insurance companies’ strategy is to “deny, delay, defend–do anything, in fact, to avoid paying claims.”

According to the report, the worst insurance companies in America are:

  1. Allstate
  2. Unum
  3. AIG
  4. State Farm
  5. Conseco
  6. WellPoint
  7. Farmers
  8. UnitedHealth
  9. Torchmark
  10. Liberty Mutual

These insurance companies insure and compensate for auto accidents, slip, and fall accidents, life insurance claims, and health insurance claims. Allstate was named the worst insurance company in America–again–in a dubious honor that seems to repeat each and every single year. According to the report, Allstate heads the list because of “a combination of lowball offers and hardball litigation.” It is even reported that insurance adjustors are instructed by their supervisors to deceive claimants by lying.

If you are insured by one of these companies you should consider switching to a more reputable insurance carrier. If you have been injured due to someone else’s negligence and find one of these companies as the insurance company for the negligent person or company, hiring the best California personal injury attorney you can find may be your best strategy.

Helpful Insurance Industry Information

Insurance Industry News Articles

  • Which are the Top Ten Worst Insurance Companies in America and Are You Insured by One of Them? Read this Article to Find Out!
    The American Association for Justice (AAJ) published a list of the ten worst insurance companies in America. Learn about the horrible things that your insurance company is doing before they do it to you.
  • Do Insurance Companies Not Treat People Fairly? Do They Have a Plan to Cheat People from Benefits They Deserve? This Report Says “Yes”!
    The American Association for Justice (AAJ) published this report telling how insurance companies have a consistent plan to deny insurance claims, delay the payment of claims, confuse people, and refuse to consider claims–all of which is intended to boost their profits at the expense of injured people.

Can an Insurance Company Hide Witness Statements?

What happens if you are involved in a car accident in California and the at-fault driver’s insurance company takes recorded statements of witnesses to the accident? Can you review them during your personal injury lawsuit?

The California Court of Appeals recently ruled in the case of Coito v. Superior Court that such statements are discoverable and must be turned over to the other party.

Are Witness Statements Protected by Attorney Work Product Privilege?

Posted on Jun 20, 2010

Are witness statements collected at the scene of an accident or by your personal injury attorney following an accident subject to the protections of the attorney work-product privilege–a privilege which allows injury accident victims to keep these statements confidential and away from the hands of insurance companies and their lawyers?

The issue was recently tackled by the Court of Appeal for the Fifth Appellate District of California in the case of Coito v. Superior Court.  The Court was asked to determine whether a statement of a witness to an accident by an attorney is protected by the work product privilege.  The Court held that such statements are not protected and can be discovered by opposing counsel during discovery.

The Court distinguished the case of Nacht & Lewis Architects, Inc. v. Superior Court holding that Nacht & Lewis did not hold that a list of witnesses from whom statements had been taken, nor the statements themselves, were privileged.  Such statements have very important evidentiary value, including containing inconsistent statements, prior consistent statements, or past recollections recorded–all of which would be admissible at trial.  However, were these statements to be protected by the attorney work-product privilege, the opposing party could not have access to these important pieces of information and evidence.

The Court also rejected a qualified attorney work-product privilege defense–in other words that in certain circumstances and with certain limitations, the privilege would exist.  The Court held that a recording or document which shows the attorney’s thoughts and interpretation of the evidence and case was protected by the privilege.  However, in most cases where the attorney or his representative is simply asking questions and the witness responses are simply answering those questions, then the privilege would not attach.  The statement would not contain any interpretive input from the attorney.  The Court also rejected the argument that the selection of the attorney’s questions itself was interpretive–the statements had evidentiary value only.

What this means, for people injured in accidents in California and the insurance companies who oppose them, is that witness statements are discoverable absent an affirmative showing that the statement contains protected interpretive analysis by the attorney.