It has become customary for liability insurance companies to “delay and pay” claims of injury victims in North Carolina. Normally, when a person is injured in an automobile or other accident he or she must wait until the very end of the case to receive compensation from the negligent party’s insurance company. When legitimate questions of liability occur, it’s understandable that the insurance company will not pay a claim without more information or proof of negligence. However, what about the clear liability cases?Even these cases can go on for more than a year. In the meantime, the injured party is expected to carry on the payment of everyday bills and expenses.
How can an injury victim who is unable to work make ends meet? And what if the injured party does not have personal health insurance or medical disability coverage and so their doctor and hospital bills fall behind for payment, or, what’s worse, the injured person simply doesn’t go to the doctor and get the needed treatment because there’s no money to pay upfront. Many doctors refuse to treat patients without insurance, hoping for payment later when and if a settlement occurs. Who in the legislative system can right this wrong? It is not a law that the insurance company must wait until the end of the case to start payment. In clear liability cases, the insurance company normally settles the property damage portion of the case very quickly so they are accepting liability and fault on behalf of their insured. But the injury proceeds rarely come forth so quickly.
The insurance company wants to make one payment, in exchange for a complete release, to settle the case. And because of that position, injury victims must wait until they are sure they are finished with treatment before considering a settlement. It is merely the insurance company’s decision to wait and wait and wait to pay for lost wages and medical expenses until one global settlement is reached or until they are legally required by a court to do so. Unfortunately, this can set up the injured person for a catastrophic situation where he or she gets so desperate that the injured party actually considers the often ridiculous low ball settlement offers from the insurance adjuster just to get some money — any money — to survive. And for these injury victims, the “delay and pay” system doesn’t work.
This article was written by Todd P. Oxner
Setting the scene: Let’s say you’re driving down the road and another vehicle crosses over the yellow line,swerves into your lane and is about to hit you. As you try to avoid getting hit by the other car, you turn your wheel hard to the right and go off the road and into a tree. Your car is totaled and you have injuries. The other car never hit you and sped away. The at-fault driver’s identity is never discovered. Fortunately, a witness traveling behind you saw the whole thing happen and stops to give you assistance.
How do you recover? The at-fault driver’s insurance is unavailable because it’s unknown. If you have uninsured coverage, the insurance company won’t pay the claim because North Carolina law requires, in a “hit and run,” that there be some physical contact from the at-fault vehicle in order for you to recover. The current law is protecting insurance companies from paying claims for single car accidents caused by the driver. But in the case of having a witness to verify the events, the proposed law would allow the described accident to be treated as a “hit and run.” We at Oxner + Permar feel that Uninsured Motorist Coverage should include coverage for the injured person and his or her vehicle any time the victim can prove that another person caused the accident (with a witness, video coverage from a nearby business, etc.)
This article was written by Todd P. Oxner
Todd Oxner recently joined the Board of Directors of the Workers Injury Law and Advocacy Group (WILG) based in Washington, DC. This non-profit organization promotes the rights of injured workers by joining together plaintiff attorneys across the country. The group shares knowledge and offers support, all in the interest of helping injured workers and their families.
Because of action by Vice President Biden, job positions for state disability determination services (DDS) should be stable and free of hiring restrictions and unpaid mandatory leaves of absence. Biden asked Governor Ed Rendell, Chairman of the National Governor’s Association, to urge all US governors not to furlough or downsize their DDS departments. If all DDS personnel are able to continue with their jobs, then social security benefits for the disabled will not be disrupted or delayed. Commission Astrue noted that state-wide reductions would save no money from state budgets because salaries and overhead are self-funded from within the department. With this plea from Vice President Biden, the heavy workload that our country’s DDS program manages for more than 12 million citizens, and the predicted increase in the number of claims, should continue to be handled without concern of DDS employees losing their jobs. And that should keep the system moving along.
This article was written by Todd P. Oxner
The House Commerce Committee has passed Senate Bill 882 Statute of Repose (Product Liability) which extends the statute of repose for damages caused by defective products from six years to 12 years (from date of product purchase). A statute of repose is an end point for pursuing a claim. Generally speaking, an injured party is barred from seeking recovery in a products liability case if the product that causes injury is over 6 years old. This new law, if passed, would extend that period to 12 years. The statute of repose is different from a statute of limitation, which, in North Carolina, states that an injury victim has 3 years from the date of injury to pursue a claim (or 2 years if the injury causes death). Regardless of when the injury occurs, if the product is over 6 years old (or 12 years under the proposed legislation) then you cannot pursue the product liability claim. Understanding the interplay between the statute of repose and the statute of limitations can be difficult. We encourage you to seek legal advice in sorting them out. The bill will now go to the House Judiciary Committee for approval. Hopefully it will become law later this year, and we will keep you updated.
This article was written by Todd P. Oxner
