Archive for the ‘In the News’ Category

Allstate forced to cut auto premiums in California

Tuesday, March 26th, 2013

SANTA MONICA, Calif.,

March 18

PRNewswire-USNewswire — California drivers with Allstate auto insurance will save a quarter-billion dollars under an order issued by Insurance Commissioner Poizner Friday that requires Allstate to lower its premiums by 15.9%. The savings are a result of Proposition 103′s prohibition on excessive rates and will lower each policyholder’s premium an average of $133 per car. Nearly two million drivers with Allstate insurance policies will see their rates go down. The order takes effect April 14.

The Commissioner’s order followed the recommendation of an administrative law judge that heard the case in November 2007. Allstate originally requested no change in its auto rates when it filed a new rate structure with the Department of Insurance in 2006, but a hearing was ordered by the Commissioner to justify those rates. The nonprofit Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) intervened to challenge the existing rate as excessive, arguing that Allstate’s rates should be lowered by 19.4% according to the rules of Proposition 103, the 1988 insurance reform initiative. The Commissioner determined that a 15.9% decrease was required.

“California Allstate drivers will save an average of $133 each, a quarter-billion dollars in total, thanks to Proposition 103′s safeguards,” said FTCR attorney Todd Foreman. “These rate reductions came about because of the ‘prior approval’ regulations that limit industry excesses and more Californians should see rate decreases soon.”

Allstate’s modified request for a mere 7% decrease after the initiation of the rate hearing was based upon contradictory tales of Allstate’s alleged financial distress in California, while at the same time, the company was boasting of record profits to Wall Street. Allstate’s net income for 2006 alone was approximately $5 billion and total shareholder return was 590% between 1994 and 2006.

“In an economy that is wreaking havoc on consumers’ bottom line, Allstate’s rate cut can be positively perceived as a $250 million stimulus package as it will provide much needed relief to nearly two million of its California customers,” said FTCR’s co-counsel Daniel Y. Zohar with the Los Angeles, CA. based Zohar Law Firm. “With everyone having to tighten their belts, we are proud that our advocacy on behalf of consumers has helped to ensure that Allstate tightens it belt, too.”

FTCR has also challenged an unjustified homeowners’ insurance rate hike requested by Allstate. If successful, the challenge will save Allstate’s homeowner policyholders approximately $350 million a year.

The Allstate auto insurance savings announced today were achieved under amended regulations issued by the Department of Insurance last year that revised guidelines for profitability and allowable expenses under the rules of Proposition 103. Prop 103 requires insurance companies to open their books and submit to public hearings to justify that rates are adequate without being excessive. Consumers may intervene in or initiate proceedings to challenge any rate that is unfair or excessive.

Using Prop 103, FTCR has helped Californians save more than $800 million dollars by challenging other auto, homeowners, and medical malpractice insurance rate proposals since 2003. A full list of previous savings is available at: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/images/InsSavings.gif.

Tort Wars

Tuesday, March 26th, 2013

I was sitting at the breakfast table on a recent Sunday morning reading through the New York Times and came across a feature article in the business section about the nationwide battle being waged between the various states trial lawyers associations and the vast conglomeration of pro-business interests seeking to restrict injured citizens access to our Court system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/22/business/22tort.html?_r=1&ref=business&oref=slogin

This is yet another chapter in a battle that has been raging for more than 20 years as national Chamber of Commerce organizations, multi-national corporations and insurance industry insiders decided that their bottom lines would improve if they could somehow avoid costly lawsuits from people who are seriously injured when their products or actions cause harm.

Arguably, some states have had a history of wildly outrageous jury verdicts – but that was a long time in the past and certainly not in Colorado. It is also irrefutable that certain bad elements among the trial lawyers have tarnished the good work that the rest of us try to do on a daily basis. However, the fact is that the insurance industry is trying to push the bar further away from being equal and fair to all parties to the point that small people like you and me will never face a fair playing field in the event we are injured and have to sue a large corporation.

The current method of restricting your rights is to try and push for legislation to limit the amount of attorney’s fees that us trial lawyers can charge when we take on a case on a contingency basis. It is a great approach. Lets face it, on the surface it sounds like it will benefit the accident victims more than anyone else. However, in reality, serious restrictions in the amount of fees charged by attorneys will severely limit injured persons’ choices when hiring a lawyer.

Accident law is a business. Even us trial lawyers have to be able to make a profit on what we do. What makes us trial lawyers unique is the extremely high degree of risk that we have to assume on behalf of our clients. In nearly all accident cases, a lawyer does not get paid until and unless he or she gets a recovery for their client. If there is no recovery, then the attorney will not be paid for the hundreds or thousands of hours that they can spend working on a complex case.

Additionally, an attorney will spend his own money to prepare the case for trial. These trial expenses can be tens of thousands of dollars on even a simple auto accident case. In large products liability cases, such as cases against drug manufacturers, the expenses can run into the millions. If a lawyer’s ability to be compensated under a contingent fee agreement for assuming this risk is limited by state legislation, the simple fact is that fewer attorneys will be able to handle these types of cases on a contingency basis – and this is what the business interests really are seeking to accomplish.

The business lobby hopes that the state legislatures will start restricting the percentage contingency that an attorney can charge to the point that it is not economically viable for a lawyer to take an injury case on a contingency.

They say that we can still charge our clients an hourly fee to work on the case therefore nobody will be harmed by these types of laws. However, the reality is that very few accident victims can afford to pay an hourly fee and certainly cannot do so if they have suffered a catastrophic injury, are facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical care and cannot work.

I find it ironic that the business lobby is saying that we trial attorneys make too much money in a time when executive compensation packages at large corporations are going through the roof. It disgusts me to think that a CEO of a large company can make millions of dollars per year and even be entitled to million dollar buyout packages when they run their companies into the ground. How much do they really care about you and I when they plunder their employees pension funds to support their bad business decisions yet still collect such exorbitant salaries?

Let me be clear that I, as a personal injury lawyer, certainly do have cases where I am handsomely compensated for my time. However, I also have cases where I barely break even, or even lose money, on a case. These are the risks I take. If I find I can make more money charging an hourly fee in another area of law – I will be forced to do it. I, and the other trial attorneys throughout the country will be fine regardless. The injured people will be the ones left holding the bag and nothing would make the business and insurance lobbyists happier.

Teens Waiting to Turn 18 to Get License!

Wednesday, August 25th, 2010

August 25, 2010 – There is a new trend in Colorado.  Teenagers are waiting until they turn 18 before getting their driver’s license.  Although laws dictating licensure have recently changed, the most common reason teens are waiting is financial.

Licensing for teenagers is guided by statute and can require a tremendous investment of time and money. Colorado law requires teens between the ages of 15 and 18 to complete a state-approved driver education course, including 6 hours of behind-the-wheel training, which can cost between $450 and $800.

In light of our economy, most teens are waiting until they turn 18 because at this age you can walk into a Department of Motor Vehicles, take a written test and walk out with your driver’s license!  It’s a positive move as most teens by this age have developed good driving habits and achieved a higher level of maturity and responsibility to hold themselves accountable when driving on their own.

Law Goes Into Effect: Booster Seats Required for Children

Wednesday, August 18th, 2010

August 15, 2010 – I was recently at a red light and looked over to the car next to me.  There was a small sedan containing three adults and three children!  There were two children in the back seat sitting in the laps of two adults and obviously wore no restraint.  As a parent, I cannot even imagine allowing my child to ride in a car without any protection to what can and does occur every second in this country – a serious car accident!

This month Colorado enacted a new law requiring children between 4 and 8 years of age to ride in booster seats. The most common injury sustained by children in automobile accidents is head trauma, and children under 1 year old are more likely to suffer from head trauma than any other age.  A rear-facing car seat is still required for babies under 1-year old and weighing less than 20 pounds.  However, after their first birthday and once they’ve reached 20 pounds, that child can be placed in a front-facing car seat.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recently reported that unrestrained children were almost three times more likely to suffer severe injuries in rollover crashes and eight times more likely in near-side impacts than restrained children.

If you cannot afford to purchase a new car seat, you can purchase an inexpensive used car seat or booster seat at garage sales, resale shops or thrift stores like Goodwill and ARC.  If you are unsure how to install a car seat or booster seat, you can take them to the nearest fire or police department and someone will educate you on the proper way to install it in your vehicle.

No one knows they will be involved in a car accident until it happens!  It comes out of the blue and with no warning.  It is our responsibility to keep our children safe!  If we don’t do it, who will?

Derailment at Tiny Town

Thursday, August 12th, 2010

August 11, 2010 – The Tiny Town train derailed this morning sending several people to the hospital for injuries including bruises, bumps, scrapes and possible broken bones.  While making the familiar curve at the north end of the park, car number 10 rolled off the track and took four other cars with it.  Three people remain in the hospital in serious condition.

Tiny Town was built at the site of the old Denver-Leadville stagecoach stop in 1915.

Colorado State Patrol Punishes Aggressive Driving Around Big Rigs

Wednesday, August 11th, 2010

August 10, 2010 – The Colorado State Patrol (“CSP”) has announced a new program called TACT – “Ticketing Aggressive Cars and Trucks” which they hope will reduce the number of accidents caused by aggressive driving of passenger vehicles around commercial trucks.  Last year crashes involving big rigs and passenger vehicles killed 31 people and injured 161 others.  Half of these accidents were caused by the driver of the passenger vehicle, and sadly over 70% of the fatalities represented occupants in those same vehicles.

The TACT program targets passenger vehicles that drive aggressively around commercial vehicles in an effort to reduce the number of fatalities involving commercial trucks.  CSP has designated three specific periods of enforcement for the TACT program:  July 19-23, August 23-27 and September 20-24.

CSP reports that the top three driving behaviors accounting for over half of all commercial vehicle-involved crashes are speeding, following too closely and unsafe lane changes.  The TACT program was developed primarily to educate all drivers on the importance of safer driving around big rigs, including allowing more space when merging and changing lanes, following behind commercial trucks, and passing other motorists.

You can avoid accidents by keeping a safe distance between you and the vehicle in front of you, stay visible when approaching commercial trucks, and don’t speed.  Also be mindful and avoid cutting in front of commercial trucks as this action reduces the truck’s distance required for braking and limits the driver’s ability to prevent an accident.  Of course, the most important thing of all – always wear your seat belt!

Fatal Accident at Greeley Mall

Friday, July 30th, 2010

July 12, 2010 – A truck driven by a 29-year old man careened through a glass wall at Visionworks in the Greeley mall, killing two women.  Authorities confirm no drugs or alcohol contributed to the accident; however, the driver’s medical condition could have caused him to lose control of his vehicle.  No charges were filed against the driver.

RTD Bus Runs Light

Friday, January 29th, 2010

January 20, 2010 – RTD bus runs red light causing a multi-car pileup at Florida Avenue and Sheridan Boulevard.  The driver of the RTD bus, who was ticketed pending the outcome of the investigation, cited “operational problems” with the bus’s brakes.  Fortunately, there were no injuries on the bus, but three people from the other vehicles were taken to the hospital with injuries.

School Bus Accident in Aurora

Friday, January 29th, 2010

January 25, 2010 – A Cherry Creek “special needs” bus collided with a car at South Tower Road and East Amherst Avenue.  The car ran a red light at the intersection causing the collision.  Two students, a students’ aide and the bus driver were taken to the hospital for treatment of bumps and bruises and released.  No one in the car was injured.

Obama Signs Executive Order Limiting Text Messaging for On-The-Job Government Employees

Monday, November 23rd, 2009

On September 30, 2009, the Obama administration ordered a ban on texting for all government employees while driving on the job or driving government-owned vehicles.

Studies show that talking on a cell phone causes almost 25% of all car accidents.  Already, seven states have banned any cellphone use while driving, 18 states have banned texting while driving, and 17 states have made it illegal for school bus drivers to use cellphones while driving.  This is all great news for U.S. drivers since last year distracted drivers caused nearly 6,000 deaths in this country alone.

The administration is considering additional restrictions on cellphone use by rail, truck and bus drivers.