+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    alldees is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3

    Both parties have same insurance Co. Conflict of interest?

    What is the name of your state? IL

    My wife was in an accident on 11/1/2007. She was going 50mph and out of nowhere a guy coming in the opposite direction pulled out in front of her totaling the van,breaking her ankle and causing whiplash. The other party got the ticket and was at fault.

    The other party has the same insurance company as us and I was wondering if this could somehow be a conflict of interest relating to the settlement.

    Thanks
  2. #2
    JETX is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Somnambulist University
    Posts
    40,807
    Quote Originally Posted by alldees View Post
    The other party has the same insurance company as us and I was wondering if this could somehow be a conflict of interest relating to the settlement.
    Since they will be paying any settlement out of their own 'pocket', of course it could affect the settlement.
    However, why concern over that at this time when she (presumably from your post) haven't received any settlement offer at this time.
  3. #3
    alldees is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by JETX View Post
    Since they will be paying any settlement out of their own 'pocket', of course it could affect the settlement.
    However, why concern over that at this time when she (presumably from your post) haven't received any settlement offer at this time.
    Thanks for your response.

    The insurance company did make an offer yesterday that we feel is too low. We're trying to figure out what is fair and trying to figure this out can be a daunting task. She still has pain and we are concerned that either the pain will never go away completely or will lead to earlier than normal arthritis which is common in ankle injuries.

    When a claim is normally handled like this does the injured persons insurance company have anything to the settlement? IOW do they mediate or anything like that?

    We are not trying to make any false or exaggerated claims but I'm old enough to know that the insurance Co. will act in their own best interest and not care about ours.
  4. #4
    Labtec600 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    229
    Quote Originally Posted by alldees View Post
    Thanks for your response.

    The insurance company did make an offer yesterday that we feel is too low. We're trying to figure out what is fair and trying to figure this out can be a daunting task. She still has pain and we are concerned that either the pain will never go away completely or will lead to earlier than normal arthritis which is common in ankle injuries.

    When a claim is normally handled like this does the injured persons insurance company have anything to the settlement? IOW do they mediate or anything like that?

    We are not trying to make any false or exaggerated claims but I'm old enough to know that the insurance Co. will act in their own best interest and not care about ours.

    No, the other company does not call your insurance to try and negotiate a price. (If thats what you're asking) As far as the same company being involved like this, both adjusters are supposed to treat this as "two seperate compaines", meaning that they cant discuss things they normally wouldnt, and they cant go and read each others notes about that.

    Thats what they're not supposed to do anyhow.
  5. #5
    ecmst12 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    35,399
    If you are unable to negotiate an acceptable settlement, she can hire a lawyer. That's pretty much the only option, as you can't go to court without one.
  6. #6
    las365 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,926
    I'm old enough to know that the insurance Co. will act in their own best interest and not care about ours.
    This is true in any insurance claim, as far as I'm concerned (I have a bias, I freely admit it). It doesn't make it any more or less true because the other driver's insurance carrier is also your insurance carrier.

    Your insurance carrier has a "first party" duty to you under YOUR insurance coverage. That is, they have a duty to act in good faith toward you as their insured in claims you make on your own coverage.

    The other party's insurance carrier does not have a duty of good faith to you in adjusting claims that you make under someone else's coverage - even if they also carry your insurance coverage.

    Accidents involving two insureds of the same carrier happen all the time. The not-at-fault driver generally doesn't get special consideration because of also being an insured. The adjuster handling the claim against the other driver's insurance coverage should not collude with the adjuster handling your first-party claims to "split" the damages or anything like that. Insurance companies are generally very good about following this rule.

    If you can't negotiate a settlement that is satisfactory to you, as ecmst12 said, your option is to hire an attorney and sue the other driver. This is where a more concerted effort to make sure that any conflict or percieved conflict doesn't affect the handling of the case. The insurance carrier would hire an attorney to represent the other driver in the suit. If the insurance company has an "in-house" counsel that usually represents insureds, it will instead hire an attorney who is outside counsel (an independent firm) so that the insurance company itself is not defending the claim. This may seem like a minor distinction, but it is actually pretty effective in protecting both you and the other driver from bad faith on the part of the carrier.
  7. #7
    alldees is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for all the info folks

    I have 1 more question and yes I have spent time doing searches on this site and others trying to figure things out. I know some are going to say every case is different, depends on the circumstances etc. but here goes.

    Is receiving a settlement of the med payout x3 unreasonable? As of right now they offered her x 1.3 which we feel is a bit low. The research I've done seems to back this up but please correct me if I'm wrong.

    Thanks Again

    P.S Some added info

    1. She was laid up able to do hardly anything for 2 weeks after (mostly the whiplash and soft tissue damage)
    2. She couldn't drive for a couple of months
    3. She was laid off a month before the accident and we had to keep her on the Cobra insurance because our new policy turned her down because of the accident (we have this in writing) so we've been paying more for her on Cobra than for me and my son combined on our new policy.
    4. She still very much has problems with her ankle and has to be careful
    Last edited by alldees; 04-27-2008 at 07:27 AM.
  8. #8
    las365 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,926
    1. She was laid up able to do hardly anything for 2 weeks after (mostly the whiplash and soft tissue damage)
    2. She couldn't drive for a couple of months
    3. She was laid off a month before the accident and we had to keep her on the Cobra insurance because our new policy turned her down because of the accident (we have this in writing) so we've been paying more for her on Cobra than for me and my son combined on our new policy.
    4. She still very much has problems with her ankle and has to be careful
    3x medicals is kind of an old school rule of thumb that isn't "automatic" anymore, if it ever was. The problem that I see you have is that you haven't properly calculated and presented her DAMAGES to the insurance carrier.

    Your numbers 2 and 3 above are the most important. You have to document and demand the actual COBRA cost (past and future). If her ankle is still problematic, she needs more treatment. Does she need physical therapy? Surgery? You should never settle a personal injury claim until you know the full extent of the treatment, probable cost of reasonable and necessary future treatment, and permanent damage (if any) and can reduce all of those to a monetary damage claim.

Similar Threads

  1. Conflict of interest
    By weezer in forum Hiring, Firing & Wrongful Termination
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-15-2006, 07:29 AM
  2. Same Insurance Company: Conflict of Interest?
    By noflameout in forum Auto Accidents and Vehicle Claims
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-15-2006, 11:55 PM
  3. conflict of interest
    By stevefranklin in forum Hiring, Firing & Wrongful Termination
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-12-2005, 06:13 AM
  4. Defamation...parties in interest
    By nospecialfx in forum Civil Litigation
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-28-2003, 11:46 AM
  5. conflict of interest
    By Jamie93 in forum Marriage, Domestic Partnerships and Other Family Law Matters
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-03-2003, 09:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

© 1995-2012 Advice Company, All Rights Reserved

FreeAdvice® has been providing millions of consumers with outstanding advice, free, since 1995. While not a substitute for personal advice from a licensed professional, it is available AS IS, subject to our Disclaimer and Terms & Conditions Of Use.