Slabbed Reports on a Blockbuster State Farm Bad Faith Case
This week I noted the recurrent problem of outcome oriented insurance company claims conduct in Adjusters Cannot in Good Faith Rely Upon Biased or Outcome Oriented Opinions. In Does It Stay or Does It Go? State Farm's Assault on Florida, I then noted a finding regarding State Farm's fitness to conduct insurance which stated:
"State Farm’s actions raise serious questions regarding the fitness and trustworthiness of its officers and directors to engage in the business of insurance."
State Farm is challenging that finding by asking for an administrative review.
Yesterday, Slabbed reported on a blockbuster Hurricane Katrina case where State Farm's conduct is at issue. Allegedly, State Farm attorneys threatened their own appraiser:
"Tucker and Spragins, both through their representations and their omissions to Minor, attempted to “set up” the Kuehns (as well as Minor; see Exhibit “B,” Second Deposition of John Minor, p. 108) in such a way as to further interfere with the appraisal process as outlined by the policy language, delay the payment of the Kuehns’ claim, and pursue their own anti appraisal agenda on behalf of State Farm. According to Minor’s testimony, the attorneys communicated with him during the appraisal process in such as way as to make him feel they were trying to “blackball” him, or “play dirty pool,” and he felt threatened. See Exhibit “B,”Second Deposition of Minor, pp.159-161. This is the man that State Farm, through Lucky Tucker and Scot Spragins, hired. The only specific instructions regarding the appraisal which Minor could actually remember were squarely in contradiction to what is actually provided for by the subject policy."
State Farm's counsel, Scot Spragins has opposed us in a number of cases. While tough as nails, sometimes confrontational, and very competitive, I have never found him to be unethical. To me, Scot is very typical of the strong stable of attorneys State Farm retains in its defense. While I wholeheartedly applaud Slabbed for bringing this important case into the public awareness, I think their post was a bit strong and premature regarding the alleged findings. Proof is another matter which everyone deserves before making such serious final judgment of someone's character.
I agree w/parts of this, Chip, but we're not in CRIMINAL court where evidence has to be proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
Frankly, if State Farm's own people feel betrayed, threatened or even just uncomfortable in an appraisal proceeding (i.e., a CIVIL proceeding), they're going to have to mention it or make their feelings known in a depo., telephone conversation, etc., to bring it to light.
I see what you're saying - but alot of criminal charges stem from underlying civil accusations and matters. In the interim, people endure character assisination(s), and (usually) after proof beyond a reasonable doubt, a conviction or vindication.
Honestly, the multiple State Farm "teams" w/their own agendas are in existence in great numbers in the U.S. - this kind of stuff happens daily.
I'm sorry, but I don't feel sorry for State Farm and I also know that's not the intent of your blog today (seeking sympathy for them).
SHIRLEY HEFLIN
Shirley,
When reading the post in Slabbed, I felt Slabbed may be "jumping the gun" with Scot Spragins' character. That was my point.
I also know Scot personally from our work against each other in the Katrina matters. Like gunslingers, I expect him to try to beat me fairly, squarely, and by the rules. I enjoy the competition. I do not shy away from that aspect of litigation. It is fun, and I enjoy the study of good trial and litigation techniques.
I hate those that "cheat" in my line of work. It makes the entire process of justice break down when attorneys allow "cheaters" to win. It is a problem with discovery in many Courts, and the judges simply have to allow a more transparent and complete production by defense counsel. Delay and deny information is the technique of the day by insurance counsel because judges are allowing it to go on. We, the Policyholder's Bar, have to do a better job of persuading judges that more complete and faster justice will occur if they will stop being duped into limiting important discovery. Slabbed made a good implicit point on this as well.
I have never found Scot to be the way he was portrayed in the allegations, and I was surprised and saddened by those allegations of his alleged involvement.
From experience, I am not surprised that State Farm has been accused of trying to "pressure" its appraiser. I feel sorry for State Farm's customer, not State Farm.
A 30-plus veteran insurance agent representing SF (no longer subsequent SF terminating my Agent's Agreement) I know all-too-well the outcome oriented claims practices used by SF adjusters.
I had a claim that was adversely affected due to outcome oriented claims investigations, no investigations.
It is sad to know that SF, its executives, are more concerned with the offshore reinsurance investments in Bermuda, Cayman Islands, and China. Check it out on the internet: Top Layer Re, Renaissance Re, Merna Re, Da Vinci Re, Glencoe Holdings.