Insurance Company Tactics
In my line of work, I hear many shocking stories about the unscrupulous methods employed by insurance companies involved in trucking accident cases, but few have had quite the impact as a story I heard from a mother of 3 named Jackie R.
Jackie contacted my firm, not to seek legal counsel or to file a lawsuit, rather, to share her story as an exposé, of sorts, in order to shed some light on the deceptive practices used by some insurance companies.
Not too long ago, Jackie’s husband Joe was killed in a trucking accident while was changing a tire on the side of the highway. The driver of an 18-wheeler was not paying attention, and he drove off the road, onto the shoulder, and crashed directly into Joe. Needless to say, Joe did not survive.
Before Jackie was even notified that her husband had died, the insurance company that represented the 18-wheeler driver had already sent an investigator and an attorney to the scene of the accident charged with the mission of building a case against Joe.
By the time Jackie was able to pull herself together and make it to the morgue, the insurance company had already realized that they bore the lion’s share of the liability in the case, and they went directly into “damage control” mode with a new mission of paying as little money as possible.
One very appalling method employed, far too often, by the insurance companies is that they will be very aggressive in trying to get the victim’s family members to settle soon after the death. This is the best time for the insurance company because the victim is in an emotionally fragile state; something the adjusters use to their advantage.
Shortly after Jackie arrived at the morgue to view her husband’s remains, an insurance company representative showed up to present a settlement offer. Naturally, Jackie was infuriated. Her brother insisted that the insurance rep leave. After much protest, the insurance rep drove away, only to call again the following day.
Jackie’s brother recommended that she sue the 18-wheeler company but Jackie insisted that she was not “money hungry” and that she was certain that she would be compensated fairly by the trucking company and their insurance carrier. After all, it was their fault. Surely they would take care of her and her children.
For the next couple of weeks, Jackie was bombarded with phone calls at her home, and even at the homes of her relatives, until she finally gave in and agreed to meet with an insurance company rep. Within minutes the insurance company dispatched a female claims adjuster who met Jackie at her sister’s house. Jackie described the adjuster as being very persuasive, and very aggressive. The insurance rep showed up with a settlement package already filled out. She explained that there was no point in hiring an attorney, since “…all a jury would give you anyway is compensation for your husband’s lost wages”, which, not-so-coincidentally, is exactly what the insurance company was prepared to offer (This was an outright lie).
Overwhelmed by the loss of her husband and frightened by the prospect of raising three children without his income and support, Jackie reluctantly agreed to the settlement, equivalent to several years worth of her husband’s salary, but only if she could have an attorney review it.
The insurance rep said, “Hang on a minute.” and within a half hour, an attorney was there to review the paperwork—the only problem was that the attorney worked for the insurance company. He skimmed through the paperwork and told Jackie that everything seemed quite fair to him. He put a pen in her hand and asked her to sign the settlement paperwork. Jackie was suspicious, but she decided to trust the insurance company lawyer and she agreed to a deal that she now realizes was obscenely unfair.
Essentially what happened is the insurance company representative lied to Jackie about the amount of money that she was entitled to. Jackie should not have only been compensated for a few years worth of her husband’s salary, she should have received compensation for all of her other damages. An experienced trucking accident attorney would have likely been able to get her fair settlement to the tune of seven figures or more. Furthermore, the attorney that worked for the insurance company acted entirely unethically in reviewing the settlement documents. Had Jackie realized what he had done, she could have filed a complaint that would have likely gotten him disbarred. The whole situation was completely unfair to Jackie and her children and the insurance company preyed on them in their moment of weakness and uncertainty.
This is one of hundreds of similar stories I have heard in my 20 years of practicing trucking accident cases. Unfortunately, this type of thing happens far too often because innocent people with good intentions make the mistake of trusting the insurance company; an entity that is only interested in their bottom line.
So what happened to Jackie? The insurance company structured the payout in such a way that as Jackie’s children became adults, the vast majority of the money stopped coming in. Now, Jackie receives only $600 per month; hardly a reasonable sum for the loss of her high school sweetheart and the father of her three children.
What happened to the insurance adjuster? Well, it’s a lot easier to climb the corporate ladder when you are the “hero” that just saved your company a few million dollars.
This is a true story as told to us by a real victim. Unfortunately, by the time she contacted us it was too late to help her. She shared this heartbreaking story as a cautionary tale to help others avoid her same fate. If you have lost a loved one in an 18-wheeler accident I strongly urge you to hire an experienced attorney who can make certain that responsible parties are held accountable.
Written by: Dallas Texas trucking accident attorney Michael Grossman
Related articles:
Questions answered in this article:
Why do I need a lawyer if the insurance company is ready to deal?