He kept me in the dark about both releases and because of that I couldn't make a logical decision on either of themAgain something I feel the attorney should've explained to me prior to me going to mediate on her bill
He kept me in the dark about both releases and because of that I couldn't make a logical decision on either of themAgain something I feel the attorney should've explained to me prior to me going to mediate on her bill
Sharp v. Preferred risk mutual insurance company, garbo v. Auto-owners insurance company, Douglass v. Allstate insurance company both v. Auto-owners insurance company, johnson v. Wausau insurance company, viconti v. Detroit automobile inter-insurance exchange, van mater v. American fidelity fire insurance companyPlease provide the case law you have referred to.
Sorry the one says both I meant boothSharp v. Preferred risk mutual insurance company, garbo v. Auto-owners insurance company, Douglass v. Allstate insurance company both v. Auto-owners insurance company, johnson v. Wausau insurance company, viconti v. Detroit automobile inter-insurance exchange, van mater v. American fidelity fire insurance company
You potentially could have a future complaint to consider against your attorney - but my recommendation for now is to make an appointment to speak to him again to find out what his reasons are for thinking the settlement as structured is a reasonable one.He kept me in the dark about both releases and because of that I couldn't make a logical decision on either of them
I think they show that a family member who is doing the services are to be compensated fairly for said services even though they are not licensed service providers. I read in one of that exact thing.You potentially could have a future complaint to consider against your attorney - but my recommendation for now is to make an appointment to speak to him again to find out what his reasons are for thinking the settlement as structured is a reasonable one.
What do you think Sharp v. Preferred Risk and the other cases show?
When I brought up the 20.00 thing to my attorney he said they put the maximum allowed but the insurance company goes more along the line of 12.00. At this point my mom gets 6.50 per day/hourI think they show that a family member who is doing the services are to be compensated fairly for said services even though they are not licensed service providers. I read in one of that exact thing.
Like I said I didn't put 20.00 an hour or day on the sheets the attorney provided then to me with that already stamped on there. I would've never told my mom she was getting 20.00 if I didn't believe she was
That is a very good question for your attorney.Why is my attorney wanting me to send this release back if it's not needed? If the insurance company doesn't need this one because I signed the one at mediation then why do they want it returned signed?
That you would be compensating your mother out of the settlement amount makes sense.I just read the attendant and household services statements and at the bottom it says my mom is to be compensated by me. Now if my attorney was working for me he should've made it clear at the mediation that I was to pay my mom the 17k, that would've changed everything. The other attorney for the insurance company was in a rush to go to lunch and wanted to get the mediation over with. What a crock of ----.
Your attorney should have made it clear to you that you were negotiating for the amount that would cover the at-home care provided by your mom.It doesn't say out of the settlement. It just says that the I the injured person would pay the service provider. Which when we were at the mediation for medical which this is part of medical my attorney didn't let me know that we were negotiating for my moms payment