If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Progressive settles with accident victim's family. All it took was losing a trial, a media firestorm, and the impending loss of countless customers   (money.cnn.com) divider line 75
    More: Followup, Progressive Insurance, financial settlement, contractual obligations, legal defense  
•       •       •

5054 clicks; posted to Business » on 18 Aug 2012 at 10:39 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



75 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-18 09:08:14 AM
A corporation that tries to paint itself as "liberal" is still a corporation.
 
2012-08-18 09:13:32 AM
And a wealth of public ignorance about how UIM coverage works.
 
2012-08-18 10:42:51 AM
I'm so glad that this fiasco cost them many times more than it woulda have cost them to pay the $75,000 they were on the hook for from the UIM coverage
 
2012-08-18 10:44:11 AM
I just switched from American Family to Progressive and with 2 cars and a teenage driver, I am saving more than $3,000 a year. I don't know if American Family was ridiculously overpriced, or if Progressive is just really cheap, or both.

I do know my wallet has no conscience. I'll keep the change.
 
2012-08-18 10:46:31 AM
So why is the victim saying progressive provided the other drivers defense and progressive says nationwide did his defense. That's confusing me, maybe progressive bought nationwide? I seem to remember something like that a while ago.
 
2012-08-18 10:59:22 AM

retarded: I just switched from American Family to Progressive and with 2 cars and a teenage driver, I am saving more than $3,000 a year. I don't know if American Family was ridiculously overpriced, or if Progressive is just really cheap, or both.

I do know my wallet has no conscience. I'll keep the change.


You get what you pay for. Good luck.
 
2012-08-18 10:59:46 AM

kronicfeld: And a wealth of public ignorance about how UIM coverage works.


THIS. Progressive was just following the rules of the state it operated in. But it completely fark'd up the handling of the PR and the victims family.

/don't automate your tweets
 
2012-08-18 11:04:01 AM

Rapmaster2000: You get what you pay for. Good luck.


Nothing but great experiences with Progressive. This story is an outlier and I will happily renew next month.
 
2012-08-18 11:12:31 AM
I guess I'm going to have to be the first to say that "Snapshot" by Progressive is reason enough for me to never use them, unless it means the difference between driving and not driving.
 
2012-08-18 11:14:26 AM
I am sick of their "Flo" ads...they are on all the time
 
2012-08-18 11:16:42 AM
At least the lying idiots got nowhere near the $760,000 they were suing for "out a a sense of honor".
 
2012-08-18 11:17:57 AM

gingerjet: Rapmaster2000: You get what you pay for. Good luck.

Nothing but great experiences with Progressive. This story is an outlier and I will happily renew next month.


I can't say I've ever happily paid an insurance bill. Does your plan include hookers?
 
2012-08-18 11:18:50 AM
farm8.staticflickr.com
Your policy states quite clearly that no claim you make will be paid. How's the nude lady?
 
2012-08-18 11:25:34 AM

Vidwiz: I am sick of their "Flo" ads...they are on all the time



Speaking of "flo"

Its time to take the woman's hygiene advertisement of the TV while your at it
 
2012-08-18 11:26:51 AM
Has the "I have USAA" lovefest started yet?


/ no?
// I have USAA!
/// ::joyous orgasm noise::
 
2012-08-18 11:30:36 AM

wrenchboy: Its time to take the woman's hygiene advertisement of the TV while your at it


Wow. You strike me as... special.
 
2012-08-18 11:32:39 AM

jkl65s4: I guess I'm going to have to be the first to say that "Snapshot" by Progressive is reason enough for me to never use them, unless it means the difference between driving and not driving.


I enrolled in the snapshot deal.

1) Plug in the device for 30 days and then send it back. If you don't drive like a maniac and at decent times of the day for 30 days, you get a discount.
2) After the 30 days, resume normal driving habits.
3) Profit?
 
2012-08-18 11:33:14 AM

kronicfeld: And a wealth of public ignorance about how UIM coverage works.


Done in two.

Look, I hate insurance companies as much as the next guy. But in MD if you have any degree of fault you lose. So Progressive has a fiduciary duty to its stockholders to try disputed UM cases, as does every insurance company.

If you don't like this, burn the MD legislature at the stake, not Progressive.
 
2012-08-18 11:35:49 AM

gingerjet: kronicfeld: And a wealth of public ignorance about how UIM coverage works.

THIS. Progressive was just following the rules of the state it operated in. But it completely fark'd up the handling of the PR and the victims family.

/don't automate your tweets


Maryland requires the insurance company for the plaintiff "actively participate in the other driver's legal defense"?

Bull.
 
2012-08-18 11:37:20 AM
Headlines taken from the last paragraph of the article get greenlight? ::scribbles down notes::
 
2012-08-18 11:40:12 AM

RickN99: gingerjet: kronicfeld: And a wealth of public ignorance about how UIM coverage works.

THIS. Progressive was just following the rules of the state it operated in. But it completely fark'd up the handling of the PR and the victims family.

/don't automate your tweets

Maryland requires the insurance company for the plaintiff "actively participate in the other driver's legal defense"?

Bull.


No, MD is what is commonly called a "no fault" state. In other words, if you are even 1% at fault, you get nothing.

Liability was in dispute. The mechanics of UM coverage require that if the case is going to trial, your own carrier essentially has to take the position against you by claiming you shared some fault.

If Progressive -- or any insurer -- had a policy of simply caving under those circumstances, the board would probably be sued by its shareholders for breach of fiduciary duty.
 
2012-08-18 11:42:49 AM
Put more simply, this woman's estate sued Progressive. Progressive defended itself in what was essentially a breach of contract suit.
 
2012-08-18 11:46:53 AM

maxx2112: Has the "I have USAA" lovefest started yet?


/ no?
// I have USAA!
/// ::joyous orgasm noise::


F*cking hate that company, some dumb biatch in a parking lot backed into our pathfinder and farked up our bumper and quarter panel. After going through all the bullshiat they said we had to sue her to get any money even after we had witnesses and a cop say she flew out of her parking space while we were about to pull forward.

Choke on a dick usaa
 
2012-08-18 11:52:51 AM
kronicfeld
And a wealth of public ignorance about how UIM coverage works.

It was was explained fairly well, so you can't claim that the outrage is due to ignorance.

No one is claiming Progressive did anything illegal, but when the insurance industry writes the laws that govern itself, then use the courts to avoid fulfilling their contractual obligations, people can identify with that and they get outraged. As they should.
 
2012-08-18 11:55:40 AM

Dear Jerk: No one is claiming Progressive did anything illegal, but when the insurance industry writes the laws that govern itself, then use the courts to avoid fulfilling their contractual obligations, people can identify with that and they get outraged. As they should.


Then take it to the legislature. Getting pissed at Progressive for this is like getting made at rain for being wet.
 
2012-08-18 11:57:16 AM

gilgigamesh: If you don't like this, burn the MD legislature at the stake, not Progressive.


Yeah it seems like a bad law to say the least. I was hit by an under insured driver and Unitrin covered the difference. The deal was in exchange for covering the difference Unitrin got first dibs on any settlement I got from the driver I sued (to cover what they gave me, basically it was an advance on whatever we'd be able to sue the guy for). That seemed fair enough. Last I heard my insurance company was busy suing the driver in an attempt to get at least some of their money back. He seemed like a deadbeat so I'm not sure if they will, but best of luck to them,

/didn't even raise my rated
 
2012-08-18 11:59:07 AM

retarded: I just switched from American Family to Progressive and with 2 cars and a teenage driver, I am saving more than $3,000 a year. I don't know if American Family was ridiculously overpriced, or if Progressive is just really cheap, or both.

I do know my wallet has no conscience. I'll keep the change.


You saved over $250 per month? I have three cars and a teenager and I pay less than $200 a month. Only one car has liability only.
 
kab
2012-08-18 12:05:49 PM
Newsflash: insurance companies exist to make, and keep, shiatloads of money. That's it.

More at 11, when we pose the question "how do banks afford such big metro buildings?"
 
2012-08-18 12:07:44 PM

lendog: retarded: I just switched from American Family to Progressive and with 2 cars and a teenage driver, I am saving more than $3,000 a year. I don't know if American Family was ridiculously overpriced, or if Progressive is just really cheap, or both.

I do know my wallet has no conscience. I'll keep the change.

You saved over $250 per month? I have three cars and a teenager and I pay less than $200 a month. Only one car has liability only.


I was paying 370 a month, that was 70 for me and 298 for my teenager. I thought that was ridiculous, and apparently it was.

Now I pay $152 a month. Although I did have collision and lower deductibles with American Family, now I have higher deductibles and just collision on my car. And I only have liability on his POS hooptie.
 
2012-08-18 12:30:11 PM
Just got the bill from my auto insurer. $710 for the year. No idea where you folks are or what you drive, but you're getting screwed.

/Company-sponsored insurer, been on policy 30 years, one claim above deductible.
 
2012-08-18 12:38:55 PM
gilgigamesh

Dear Jerk: No one is claiming Progressive did anything illegal, but when the insurance industry writes the laws that govern itself, then use the courts to avoid fulfilling their contractual obligations, people can identify with that and they get outraged. As they should.

Then take it to the legislature. Getting pissed at Progressive for this is like getting made at rain for being wet.

Most people want consumer protections that would make this sort of thing illegal. Don't pretend I can submit a reasonable bill that crosses the interests of the insurance lobby, and that that bill will become law. Anger toward lobbyists, legislatures, businesses that abuse their power, and people who don't vote is completely valid. Anger toward the wetness of water is absurd. I'm also not blaming the courts.
 
2012-08-18 12:42:21 PM

gilgigamesh: RickN99: gingerjet: kronicfeld: And a wealth of public ignorance about how UIM coverage works.

THIS. Progressive was just following the rules of the state it operated in. But it completely fark'd up the handling of the PR and the victims family.

/don't automate your tweets

Maryland requires the insurance company for the plaintiff "actively participate in the other driver's legal defense"?

Bull.

No, MD is what is commonly called a "no fault" state. In other words, if you are even 1% at fault, you get nothing.

Liability was in dispute. The mechanics of UM coverage require that if the case is going to trial, your own carrier essentially has to take the position against you by claiming you shared some fault.

If Progressive -- or any insurer -- had a policy of simply caving under those circumstances, the board would probably be sued by its shareholders for breach of fiduciary duty.


I am not disputing the fault stipulations and the need for a trial. I am disputing the claim that Maryland law requires that the insurance company actively defend the other party and not represent their insured client. Progressive did not "essentially" take the position against the dead woman; they actually took the position.

If Maryland law required this, then Progressive would have said "we are required under Maryland statute xxx.xxx.x to defend the other party, etc,etc." They did not.

If Maryland law required this, then there would be numerous identical stories from Nationwide customers, State Farm customers, etc. Where are they?
 
2012-08-18 12:52:55 PM
Switched from Geico to Progressive and saved a ton a couple months ago. I guess you get what you pay for...
 
2012-08-18 01:27:41 PM

Dear Jerk: gilgigamesh

Dear Jerk: No one is claiming Progressive did anything illegal, but when the insurance industry writes the laws that govern itself, then use the courts to avoid fulfilling their contractual obligations, people can identify with that and they get outraged. As they should.

Then take it to the legislature. Getting pissed at Progressive for this is like getting made at rain for being wet.

Most people want consumer protections that would make this sort of thing illegal. Don't pretend I can submit a reasonable bill that crosses the interests of the insurance lobby, and that that bill will become law. Anger toward lobbyists, legislatures, businesses that abuse their power, and people who don't vote is completely valid. Anger toward the wetness of water is absurd. I'm also not blaming the courts.

 
2012-08-18 01:30:59 PM
CNN had no mention of this story until after the settlement.
god forbid they make there advertisers angry.
 
2012-08-18 01:38:57 PM

Dear Jerk: Most people want consumer protections that would make this sort of thing illegal. Don't pretend I can submit a reasonable bill that crosses the interests of the insurance lobby, and that that bill will become law. Anger toward lobbyists, legislatures, businesses that abuse their power, and people who don't vote is completely valid. Anger toward the wetness of water is absurd. I'm also not blaming the courts.


My point is that getting angry at an insurance company for this is misdirected. It is doing what a company does: make as much money as legally possible. The only way to change that is to change the law. If you want to get angry about no fault insurance laws I think that's valid. They are stupid.

You can yell at the clouds if that's what suits you, although it accomplishes nothing. But don't conflate apathy with powerlessness. Other states (including mine) don't have this rule, so it is obviously possible to change it. If your state has a no fault law, work to change it.

Or just biatch about it on fark. I'm sure that will be just as effective.
 
2012-08-18 01:45:21 PM

maxx2112: Has the "I have USAA" lovefest started yet?


/ no?
// I have USAA!
/// ::joyous orgasm noise::


Just dumped them after their bank decided to bounce a check even though their own notification showed I had the funds to cover it in the account. They then refused to waive the fees or reimburse me for the fees I was charged by the recipient. They explained that they bounced it because eventually I had other things coming that would bounce if they didn't bounce it or I didn't add more funds. They further explained I don't understand how banking works.

I have 15 years in banking.
 
2012-08-18 02:08:42 PM

gilgigamesh: Dear Jerk: No one is claiming Progressive did anything illegal, but when the insurance industry writes the laws that govern itself, then use the courts to avoid fulfilling their contractual obligations, people can identify with that and they get outraged. As they should.

Then take it to the legislature. Getting pissed at Progressive for this is like getting made at rain for being wet.


We the people can't compete with industry stuffing the pockets of legislators.
 
2012-08-18 02:12:29 PM

lohphat: We the people can't compete with industry stuffing the pockets of legislators.


The legislature that requires insurance companies in its state to make this kind of coverage available to consumers in the first place?
 
2012-08-18 02:25:42 PM

kronicfeld: lohphat: We the people can't compete with industry stuffing the pockets of legislators.

The legislature that requires insurance companies in its state to make this kind of coverage available to consumers in the first place?


You forgot: "At great profit to the insurance companies which make it intentionally challenging to pay out claims."
 
2012-08-18 02:29:42 PM
So they are progressive in the same way that sell out Obama is.
 
2012-08-18 02:36:23 PM

Bob16: So they are progressive in the same way that sell out Obama is.


But not nearly as much as the flip-flopper RomneyHood is.
 
2012-08-18 02:42:37 PM

Altair: Switched from Geico to Progressive and saved a ton a couple months ago. I guess you get what you pay for...


Sometimes I think it works like a casino. I've been through four or five companies in 18 years of driving. Geico is by far the lowest - laughably low for me. I pay $53 a month for high limit full coverage on a 2010 S4. Other people I know have cars worth 1/5 what mine is and pay over $150 a month. (and not terrible driving records)

When I see a commercial offering savings of $500 a year over Geico I'm not sure who those people are. One would assume that math is math and the actuaries would rate drivers similarly across companies but they apparently don't.
 
2012-08-18 02:48:25 PM
In the past 18 months I've gon from GEICO to Progressive back to GEICO and now to Liberty Mutual. Rates change a lot so every 6 months I shop around. I also call USAA but strangely their rates have never been lowest.
 
2012-08-18 03:00:15 PM

Rapmaster2000: You get what you pay for. Good luck.


After this broke I asked the friend of me who is the personal injury lawyer what he felt about Progressive. I realize this is one person only but he said they are among the easiest to deal with. I switched to them from USAA and have not regretted this. One claim and they were very quick to deal with this although I did not die in this so who knows.

jkl65s4: I guess I'm going to have to be the first to say that "Snapshot" by Progressive is reason enough for me to never use them, unless it means the difference between driving and not driving.


I saved 18% on the premium of me to drive for 2 or 3 months with the device which tracks the number of miles driven, the time of the driving, and the number of hard breaks. OM MAGOODNESS BIG BROTHER!

Also you do not have to use this. It is the discount based on the driving habits.
 
2012-08-18 03:01:51 PM

meow said the dog: I saved 18% on the premium of me to drive for 2 or 3 months


Sorry this was 60 days. I am happy I did this. The savings of 18% is great. I should have saved more than this but did the hard braking too often. Beats not the saving at all. BUT OM MAGOODNESS BIG BROTHER!
 
2012-08-18 03:12:27 PM
gilgigamesh
You can yell at the clouds if that's what suits you, although it accomplishes nothing. But don't conflate apathy with powerlessness. Other states (including mine) don't have this rule, so it is obviously possible to change it. If your state has a no fault law, work to change it.
Or just biatch about it on fark. I'm sure that will be just as effective.


Right. I'll quit my job and take on the insurance industry.
We have a House of Representatives because the founders of this country knew that it was somewhere between impractical and impossible for ordinary people to even keep up with the business of government. That's right in the opening of Paine's Common Sense. And de Tocqueville noted that America runs on public opinion. So I disagree with you. Aside from voting, biatching is the the most effective thing most people can do in a democracy.
Do you think Progressive would have ended up paying a generous settlement if they were able to keep this thing quiet?
 
2012-08-18 03:20:18 PM

maxx2112: Has the "I have USAA" lovefest started yet?


/ no?
// I have USAA!
/// ::joyous orgasm noise::


Trust me, you do not want to hear the grunts and sounds I make during a joyous orgasm.

Got an amazing rate through a subsidiary of Liberty Mutual for my Renter's and Auto insurance. Claims have been hassle free and relatively painless.

First company that uses enough lube when that assfark me that I kinda enjoy it, and even consider wiggling a little for them.
 
2012-08-18 03:22:08 PM
But you should definitely let them put a tracking device in your car. No way that will come back to harm you.
 
2012-08-18 03:30:52 PM

Dear Jerk: Right. I'll quit my job and take on the insurance industry.


No matter what the cause, Fark has a shill ready to jump on the case and explain why we are all wrong for being outraged about xyz, mostly using empty rhetoric and spurious logic.

It's more entertaining at least when it's someone saying how Sarah Palin truly is the best candidate. It's just boring when some asshole is defending insurance scum or carnies or the USPTO.
 
Displayed 50 of 75 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report