Boston Injury Lawyer Blog

Massachusetts drivers pay a premium for automobile insurance. Boston personal injury attorneys focus on victims of collisions. We need to also aid our clients, who are consumers in the purchasing of insurance, from the perspective of a Massachusetts injury lawyer. According to the most recent statistics, from the Massachusetts Office of Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation (OCA) the insurance company with the most complaints was Commerce, located in Webster, Massachusetts. Of course, Commerce also has the largest share of "premiums" in Massachusetts. Thus, a more relevant statistic might be the number of complaints per $10,000 in premiums paid. Commerce had 1.47 complaints per $10,000.00 in premiums paid. The highest number of complaints per premium dollar was Pilgrim Insurance Company, with 4.49 complaints per $10,000 in premiums paid. The statistics are for 2008, the most recent year they are published by OCA.

The following is a list from the Massachusetts OCA:

Insurance Company premium share in 2008 complaints per $10k premiums
Commerce 31.00% 1.47
Safety Group 11.05% 1.65
Arbella Insurance Group 9.25% 1.02
Liberty Mutual Group 8.37% 1.53
Metropolitan Group 6.53% 2.10
Travelers Group 6.28% 2.14
Plymouth Rock Insurance 5.88% 1.37
Hanover Insurance Group 3.84% 1.96
Amica Mutual Group 3.62% 1.56
White Mountain Group 2.49% 1.71
US Automobile Ass. 2.21% 0.63
Allstate 2.11% 1.53
Quincy Mutual Group 1.67% 0.97
Main Street American 1.26% 0.86
Progressive Group 1.24% 4.12
Norfolk & Dedham Group 1.12% 1.44
Allianze Insurance 0.48% 3.91
Pilgrim Insurance 0.48% 4.49
State Farm Group 0.42% 0.64
Electric Insurance Group 0.40% 2.69
13 other groups 0.39% 7.67

From the OCA statistics we can deduce some clear patterns. The 13 "other" groups, which are only .39% of the market, have a very high complaint rate. Wherefore they are not likely to gain a bigger share of the market! Progressive Group, which includes Progressive Direct Insurance Company, seems to have a very high rate of complaints. Pilgrim Insurance, a company we work with frequently, has a similarly high rate of complaints.

The three companies with the lowest rates are United Services Automobile Association Group, which includes the United Services Automobile Association and the USAA Casualty Insurance Company; State Farm Group, which includes State Farm General Insurance Company and State farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company; and, Quincy Mutual Group, which includes Quincy Mutual Fire Insurance Company. Why? There does not seem to be any clear pattern. However, the companies with the smaller share of the market seem to have a better track record; after all, the 10 companies with the largest market share (Commerce, Safety, Arbella, Liberty, Metropolitan, Travelers, Plymouth Rock, Hanover, Amica and White Mountain) all have high rate of complaints. Those companies, however, represent a mere 4.3% of the motor vehicle insurance market.

There are several things that concern us. First, the complaint rate is too high. What is the Massachusetts Office of Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation doing about it? They are supposed to protect consumers. Second, Commerce commands a huge share of the market. What are the other companies going to do about that? Commerce, founded in 1971 and bought in 2008 for over $2 billion by Mapfre, the largest insurer in Spain and a leading insurance company in Latin America. What are their plans with the 31% premium share?

The law requires a minimum of Massachusetts uninsurance insurance coverage and Massachusetts underinsurance coverage. That minimal Massachusetts insurance amount is $20,000. We have written extensively about the dangers of this: if you a victim of a Massachusetts motor vehicle accident and suffer serious injuries or loose income from a motor vehicle accident, you are limited to the amount of insurance the person causing the accident has. However, if you have sufficient underinsurance coverage, you can apply to your own insurance company for monies for pain, suffering and lost earnings. After 25 years of practicing law in Massachusetts, I have extensive experience in this. For example, last year we secured the full underinsurance policy for a young woman with a severe traumatic brain injury after she was struck by a taxi in a crosswalk - the taxi, like most taxis in Massachusetts - had only the statutory minimum insurance policy of $20,000.

Continue reading "Underinsurance in Massachusetts, Again!" »

Your insurance company is responsible for defending you if someone sues you after a Massachusetts motor vehicle accident, or a slip and fall accident at your home in Boston. Right? Sure, however, insurance companies often decline to defend you under what they call a "reservation of rights." In those cases, they may defend you but not guarantee to pay a judgment, or they may not hire a Massachusetts trial lawyer to defend you.

In a case handed down by the Massachusetts Appeals Court, the Court said that when Northern Security Insurance Company failed to defend a landlord being sued, and then failed to pay the attorney that the landlord hired privately, Northern Security owed the landlord the reasonable attorney fees for that attorney. Northern Security wanted to pay a reduced, contract rate, of insurance. The Court held that because Northern Security did not have a contract with that attorney, they had to pay the reasonable rate. Further, they had to do it timely. See Northern Security Insurance v. R.H. Realty Trust.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Insurance Lawyers Fees" »

In a recent case in which a victim of a horrific motor vehicle collision in Medway sued the negligent truck driver that rear ended her, the Appeals Court found that the insurance companies have an obligation to make a reasonable settlement offer no matter what the demand. This case reassures victims of motor vehicle accidents and other personal injuries that insurance companies must make reasonable offers of settlement.

We won't get into the injuries or damages for this article; however, they were extensive, including paralysis. The truck driver's insurance company offered their full policy of $2 million, however, there was an excess umbrella policy administrated by AIG insurance. Notwithstanding having all of the medical records, and a high evaluation for the case, AIG decided to make a strategic low offer of settlement. Wherefore the case went to a jury which came back with a verdict of over $9 million, plus costs and interest of about $2 million. With appeals pending, AIG finally made a reasonable offer and the main case settled against the truck driver for the victim and her family. However, the plaintiffs did not settle their case against AIG for failing to effectuate a reasonable settlement in a timely fashion, under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 93A and 176D. That case went to the Appeals Court.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Personal Injury Victims Win Unfair Claims Settlement Against Insurance Companies" »

In a case handed down by the Massachusetts Appeals Court recently, the Court held that AIG did violate the unfair settlement act of Massachusetts. In every case in which an insurance company is involved, the law in Massachusetts says that the insurance company must effectuate a prompt, fair and equitable settlement once liability becomes clear. In motor vehicle accidents, insurance companies have fairly simple protocols to determine liability. In this case, where an 18 wheeler truck collided with the rear end the plaintiff's vehicle, even the insurance company admitted their insured was at fault.

In this case, there was a horrific collision in which the plaintiff, Marcia Rhodes, was instantly and permanently paralyzed as a result of the trauma. Her attorneys prepared a settlement package for the insurance companies. Unfortunately, what happened was that the insurance companies hired a company to investigate, then went through staffing changes, and then used their bureaucracy to o delay responding to Rhodes' settlement demand. They also hired and rehired counsel to delay things further.

Insurance companies spent over $31 million, split almost evenly between Democrats and Republicans, in the recent mid term elections. This is about the same as they spend in the last mid term election cycle, in 2006. (In that election, however, they were 2 to 1 in favor of the republicans.) These numbers do not include money spent on lobbying, which is estimated at over $120 million so far this year. As a Boston personal injury lawyer, I see everyday how this money trickles down to have an adverse effect on clients who are the victims of an injury.

Independent insurance agents contributed more than ever before to federal Congressional races, declaring a 93% success rate. We don't have the breakdown for Massachusetts Congressional races, but it doesn't matter. Money given to federal legislators influences federal law, which, of couse, affects us here in Massachusetts. The Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America (IIABA or the Big "I") is a political action committee, called InsurPac, which encourages members to contribute to the PAC so that the PAC can distribute the money strategically.

Boston and all Massachusetts practitioners licensed under Massachusetts General Laws, chapter 112 now have a recent Appellate court decision that alters reimbursement for auto accidents, bicycle accidents, pedestrian accidents and all such cases reimbursed through PIP. The Appellate Division has changed the way Massachusetts insurers are allowed to submit medical bills for review and thus calculate amounts paid to providers. The attorney's at the Boston Law Office of Neil Burns want our clients to stay current on changing PIP practices.

In a case where Premier Insurance refused to pay 20% of the medical bills of an injured plaintiff, after it submitted the bills to an "outside" company for review, the Court found that there was no proof that they actually did submit the bills to an outside company. Wherefore, the Court found against Premier and ordered them to pay the bills. See Howard Physical Therapy, Inc. v. Premier Insurance Co. (Appellate Division, Northern District) (App. Div. No. 10-ADMS-10029) (Sept. 23, 2010).

Boston Municipal Court's Appellate Division recently decided a Massachusetts case that changes the way collection of outstanding bills from PIP will now be handled. Handling personal injury, auto and car accident and injury cases throughout the Boston area, the attorneys at the Law Office of Neil Burns make every effort to keep providers current regarding changes to the law affecting their billing and collection practices and considerations.

We previously blogged about this case whereas the ruling also concerned, and changed, the acceptable parameters of having bills reviewed for reasonable and customary charges within a provider's geographical area. This case is notable because it also addressed the manner in which PIP insurers are able to dismiss claims for unpaid and/or disputed bills following a claim for the same.

Continue reading "Massachusetts PIP Insurer's Payment of Disputed Bill" »

Boston and its area suburbs in Massachusetts suffered substantial flooding during a six day period in May 2006. And a case recently decided in Essex Superior Court shows the need to make sure you fully understand all your insurance policies, including: car accident and injury insurance and homeowner's insurance. The personal injury attorneys at the Boston Law Office of Neil Burns want to inform Massachusetts residents regarding their homeowner's insurance policies. We deal with insurance companies every day, and we understand the complexity of insurance policies.

In the case, Cortina Realty Trust obtained a homeowner's policy of insurance the following exclusion: 'This policy does not insure against loss or damage caused by, resulting from, contributed to or aggravated by: (a)(2) flood, meaning surface water, waves tide or tidal water, and the rising (including the overflowing or breaking of boundaries) of lakes, ponds, reservoirs, rivers, harbors, streams, and other similar bodies of water whether driven by water or not; (b)(1) backing up of sewers or drains due to an occurrence of nature.'

Continue reading "Water Damage and Massachusetts Homeowner Insurance" »

The Massachusetts Appeals Court, sitting in Boston, recently found that Arbella Mutual Insurance acted in an unfair and deceptive manner in respect to its insured and their claim for personal injury damages resulting from a car accident. Like the Boston personal injury attorneys at the Law Office of Neil Burns, a personal injury attorney is best equipped to present your personal injury claim to an insurance company. As this note demonstrates, insurance companies do not always treat their insureds, who are injured in car accidents, fairly.

The case was decided on August 30, 2010, and involved Arbella and the passenger in the vehicle Arbella insured. The vehicle driven by Arbella insured was involved in a car accident and the passenger was subsequently injured. The passenger retained counsel, and after months of waiting for Arbella to respond to her demand for damages, her attorney sent a demand letter to Arbella. Arbella waited five months to respond to the demand letter, and then waited an additional seven months to proffer settlement money.

Continue reading "Arbella Hit With Unfair Settlement Practice" »

In an attempt to supplement city budgets, Massachusetts fire departments are using a collection company in California to collect fees against Massachusetts auto insurance companies. The fees will apparently be levied against drivers who call fire departments when they are not necessary. It is not clear if the California collection agency will go after individuals, and whether it will report unpaid claims to the credit agencies. When personal injury attorneys receive our clients ambulance bills from fire departments, we submit them to the Personal Insurance Protection (PIP) insurance carrier, and they are routinely paid.

We ask our clients and local firefighters to inform us if they have any news about this new program.

If you are injured in Massachusetts, in a car accident or while walking in and around Boston, for example, you should know that Massachusetts car insurance policies have a provision whereby you can collect money for your car accident injury or pedestrian injury from your own insurance company if the at-fault driver does not have enough of their own insurance to pay you for your injury. Of course, caution the attorneys at the Boston Law Office of Neil Burns, you must elect to carry this type of coverage in the first place.

We have, for years, written about and urged our clients to buy sufficient underinsurance coverage for their Massachusetts motor vehicle insurance policies. A good example of why you should do so could be shown by a case that was decided recently by the Suffolk Superior Court. In this case, several pedestrians were injured as a result of the negligence of a motor vehicle driver. However, the driver did not have sufficient insurance coverage to pay for the damages. Wherefore, the Court held that Premier Insurance Company, the insurance company of the plaintiff, must cover the plaintiff because he had "underinsurance" coverage.

Continue reading "Not Enough Insurance Money to Pay for Your Injury" »

You live in Boston. You were injured in an accident in Massachusetts. You sought medical treatment, maybe at Massachusetts General Hospital or Boston Medical Center, for example, and got yourself better. Now it is time to settle your personal injury case with the insurance company. But what is a reasonable offer of settlement given your injuries and your case? First, talk with your Boston personal injury attorney, they are in the best position to advise you regarding your particular claim. The Boston attorneys at the Law Office of Neil Burns routinely offer such advice to their clients.

In Massachusetts, we have two primary statutes that apply to insurance companies when they fail to make a reasonable settlement. First, there is Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A, the Consumer Protection Statute. Second there is Massachusetts General Laws Chapter. 176D. Both of these laws protect consumers of insurance and those who file claims under insurance policies that are in effect in Massachusetts.

Continue reading "Insurance Company's Offer of Settlement" »

In a case handed down by the Boston Municipal Trial Court the plaintiff, Juarbe, bought automobile insurance from Commerce. Following a motor vehicle accident in which Juarbe was hurt, medical attention was needed and medical bills were generated. Personal Injury Protection (PIP) insurance, which Jerube had, and which is, by law and by contract, supposed to insure such medical services, was denied to Jerube by Commerce. This has happened many times with our personal injury clients who are victims of motor vehicle accidents.

What typically happens in our cases is that we advocate for the client and the bills are worked out. Often however, the lawyer, as in the Jerube case, must file a Consumer Protection letter which provides multiple damages and attorney fees if the consumer wins the case. In the Jerube case, Commerce quickly paid the medical bills and then retained an insurance defense firm to continue to fight the injured plaintiff in court. The Court, in this case, decided that the 93A case could continue as he "plaintiff has raised a genuine issue of material fact" regarding Commerce's bad faith in violation of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 93A.

See Juarbe v. Commerce Insurance Company, Boston Municipal Court Docket Number 0907-CV-0952.

Boston Municipal Court's Appellate Division recently decided an important case clarifying a Massachusetts insurer's use of the Personal Injury Protection Application in relation to extending Personal Injury Protection benefits. Boston personal injury and car accident attorney Thiadora A. Pina, of the Law Office of Neil Burns, notes this case lends direction to a long standing issue regarding payment of PIP benefits. "Massachusetts insurers have long held to the notion that you must return their individual form in order to be eligible for PIP benefits," notes Attorney Pina. "Finally, we know the issue remains prejudice to the insurer, not what particular form is filed."

The facts of the case recently decided concerned a 2005 motor vehicle accident. The injured party was a passenger in a motor vehicle insured by defendant Pilgrim Insurance Company. The policy was considered a "standard Massachusetts automobile policy" which included PIP, or personal injury protection insurance. This insurance, known as no-fault, provides up to $8,000 for medical bills and a percentage of lost wages.

Continue reading "PIP Benefits Do Not Hinge On Application Alone" »