Lott Sues Insurance Co. in Katrina Damage

[Rose Siding]

JACKSON, Miss. -- U.S. Sen. Trent Lott is suing his insurance company over his beachfront Pascagoula home, which was leveled by Hurricane Katrina.

The law office of Lott's brother-in-law, high-profile plaintiff's Richard "Dickie" Scruggs, filed the federal lawsuit Thursday on behalf of Lott and his wife against State Farm.
....
"Today I have joined in a lawsuit against my longtime insurance company because it will not honor my policy, nor those of thousands of other south Mississippians, for coverage against wind damage due to Hurricane Katrina," said Lott, R-Miss. "There is no credible argument that there was no wind damage to my home in Pascagoula."
....
Republican Gov. Haley Barbour has said he prefers to negotiate with insurance companies, saying lawsuits could force the companies out of Mississippi.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/15/AR2005121502138.html

[RagingInMiami]

1. But didn't the shrub guarantee it will be repaired?

[Dunvegan]

3. Nope. Not Lott's office...

...just his house porch.

Shrub said he looked forward to being able to sit and sip mint julips on Lott's porch or some such.

Obviously, the mint is just to cover the rotting stench, oh, and the smell of the flood toxins, too.

[Liberty Belle]

2. Too bad Lott didn't file a class action to help those other homeowners,

instead of only looking out for his own hide.

[No Exit]

43. It would be kinda hard for Trent to do that

since his party is in the process of passing legislation which will effectively phase class action lawsuits out of existence.

[Bake]

48. Actually, there already IS a class action ...

filed on behalf of MS homeowners. The problem is getting a class certified in this type of case.

Bake
Mississippi Lawyer

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

4. I am shocked. Shocked. I tell you.

Let's see. Where do you start on this one?

Is this a "frivolous law suit" brought by a millionaire?

Will he return the percentage he recovers to FEMA?

Will he, as he said of people living the Mississippi and Missouri River floodplains, insist on the Senate floor that his home not be rebuilt?

Can he kiss his payola from insurance companies goodbye now?

Oh, I know... he is a rugged individualist who has no need of help from the big, bad government, he will introduce legislation to pay for his damages.

[tularetom]

5. For probably the first time in my life

I agree with this piece o shit. This is a major scam by insurance companies (wind v. flood damage) and I'm sure a lot of Gulf coast residents not as well connected as Lott are getting fucked over by their insurance companies and this case might result in a favorable precedent on their cases as well. Good luck bad toupee man.

[Erika]

7. He didn't try to make it a class action suit

That would have helped all.

[Bake]

49. See above ... there already is a class action

But a class is going to be difficult to certify under the federal rules.

Bake

[Rose Siding]

9. As long as if after he wins, he doesn't write laws against it for others

-like Santorum re: personal injury case caps, after his own wife won a large settlement.

[No Exit]

44. HA! Oh, we know we can trust him!

Now that he's been "mugged" by circumstances, we just know ANY good republican will heretofore have great empathy for people to whom this happens in the future.:rofl:

There was an old saying: "A conservative is a liberal who's been mugged." I say, a "liberal" is a "conservative" who's ever had to try to get his insurance company to live up to its contract with him!

[No Exit]

40. True, but just remember..

From now on, the well-heeled, republican, rich-guy, grey poupon Trent Lott is a member of that icky, sleazy, scumbag, group called "personal injury plaintiffs." (Just like the well-heeled, republican, rich-guy, grey poupon Rick Santorum, who, along with his wife, sued a chiropractor in a personal injury case and won a judgment, thus helping to enrich some greasy, sleazeball, plaintiff's attorney.)

Ain't it great?

And, yes, the insurance companies are screwing just about ALL the property owners who lost big during the hurricane and floods. (I know some of the property owners.) They are doing what they ALWAYS do--waiting them out. The rich insurance companies, which collect millions or probably trillions of profits, can afford to wait. The people can't. The people have nowhere to live. The insurance companies will starve them down until the people will be glad to get a fraction of what their policies should have paid.

Oh, and on a related note, a favorite trick of workers' comp insurers is to stop paying regular workers' comp checks RIGHT AROUND CHRISTMAS. For no reason. They just cut the checks off.

This is STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY PRACTICE. Happens every day, everywhere (in this country, anyway.)

[Daphne08]

45. Too many residents are being screwed by insurance

companies!

My family has many friends along the Gulf Coast and yes, the insurance companies are denying too many claims. It's outrageous!

[Erika]

6. You notice how the GOP hates lawyers unless they are GOP?

Then all of a sudden GOP lawyers are heroes? Damn hypocrites.

[unblock]

8. they're happy with liberal lawyers, too

just as long as they're in the employ of banana republicans.


the truth, of course, is that it's banana republicans that CREATED the highly litigious environment we have today.
they did this by cultivating business practices that leave corporate victims such as consumers and employees and minority shareholders little choice but to either bend over and take it or sue the bastards.

the wind vs. rain scam is just one of many examples.


10 years ago i received massive injuries while a PASSENGER in a cab. neither the cab company, their insurance company, the car behind that hit us, nor THEIR insurance company, would even OFFER me jack shit until i sued both insurance companies. i OBVIOUSLY was not at fault. the reasons for doing this were completely cynical: it would delay payment for about 3 years, and during that time, there's a chance i might die or give up.

there would have been two fewer lawsuits if they had just honored their policies, but basically, there's no real punishment for them abusing the legal system to delay payments and make collections difficult.

[EFerrari]

17. I used to translate in cases like yours.

Not only do insurance companies use time but they also use pain. They order up all kinds of awful medical tests for the plaintiff to make them as uncomfortable as possible in hopes they will give up and go away. It's horrible.

[unblock]

19. yup. victims entitled to the insurance maximum are particularly screwed

since the insurance company then has NOTHING to lose by delaying.


i'm convinced that, AT A MINIMUM, insurance companies should be required to pay interest back to the date of loss if they delay payment.

[EFerrari]

25. Right on. Put a consequence there for these bastards.

I'll never forget one lady that I was translating for during yet another test that she was put through. She was in so much pain and the testing was four hours long that day. The whole crew acted like her pain was an inconvenience and WE WERE AT A HOSPITAL.

It was shameful. And that was in the early 80s. Can only imagine what it's like today.

I hope your case went well, unblock.

[unblock]

27. well, eventually i "won" both cases and got the insurance maximum

minus what the cab company got to make THEM whole first. %$##%!$!!

my lawyer was family, conveniently enough, so i got a bit of a deal (25% vs. the usual 33% -- i mean, he did have expenses and so on). but after the lawyer took his cut, and my health insurance took their cut (that's right, the health insurance gets made whole, too -- %$#%#$!!), and the rest of the pending medical bills got paid, there wasn't much at all left over for me. certainly not enough to compensate for the damage to a wall street career that a full year in physical therapy can do (how do you prove that your bonus should have been MUCH higher, anyway?) , nevermind all the pain and suffering....

in retrospect, it almost wasn't worth the bother, which is exactly what the insurance companies count on. and i had an open and shut case. NO WAY could i have lost that. i mean, passenger in a cab, for crying out loud!

i certainly "earned" much, much less on an hourly basis than i do at my regular gig.

[QC]

20. I don't think Dickie Scruggs is a Republican.

He was the lead lawyer on that huge tobacco lawsuit, and is now suing hospitals for gouging the uninsured.

[Rowdyboy]

21. He's gives heavily to Democrats-he just happens too be Trent's.....

brother in law.

I believe this is a class action lawsuit being filed by Scruggs.

[Inland]

29. Mississippi must be a damn small world

if Lott's binlaw is Dickie Scruggs.

[No Exit]

38. YES!!! DING DING DING DING DING!!! WE HAVE A WINNER!!!

Okay, I know there are a couple of lawyer-haters around here--now pay close attention here.

"THE GOP HATES LAWYERS UNLESS THEY ARE GOP." Got that??

So that means when you agonize over what "pricks" lawyers are, and how they are always "taking advantage", you are often echoing a meme that was put out there by the REPUBLICANS.

Which is fine, I guess. I guess you might say, "well, I agree with republicans on some things..."

Well, my viewpoint is: I start with the proposition that I agree with republicans on NOTHING. Then, IF they convince me that ANYthing they believe/push/peddle is correct, I MAY give their propaganda a TRIAL RUN.

So far, none of their propaganda has gotten beyond the trial run stage with me.

This goes back to what happened in about '92 when President Bush came here for a public appearance and I took my eldest to see the president. We all (hundreds of us unwashed commoners) went through metal detectors. President Poppy gave a speech. We were all happily listening. (I was a deluded republican supporter at the time.) Then President Bush started carping about "lawyers" and "lawsuits" which were "ruining our system" (READ:"cutting into insurance companies' profits"). I impulsively yelled out, "So how many people have YOU sued?"

I figured that a Big Business rich guy like Poppy has probably sued a LOT of people over the course of his life. Gotta protect his wealth, after all.

The people standing near me attacked. I answered them back. But eventually everyone quieted down.

(Meanwhile, WAAAAAAAAYYYYY in the back of us, I saw a few people holding anti-Bush signs. They were way, way, back there--kept away by Imperial Bush Police. Saddam's Guard had nothing on Imperial Bush Police.)

[OneBlueSky]

10. it's these frivolous lawsuits that keeps all of our rates high! . . . n/t

.

[Supersedeas]

37. Trial lawyers and Frivolous Lawsuits -- unless its a Rethug lawsuit

[Up2Late]

11. Sounds like a "Frivolous Lawsuit" to me, Hey Trent! Read your policy...

...next time! Does it cover 28 foot walls of water, ie Strom surge? I doubt it. :freak:

Trent! WHY do you Hate America!?!

[bluestateguy]

12. Hrmph!

Lott is depending on one of those money grubbing lawyers filing one of those frivilous lawsuits in front of one of those activist judges who legislates from the bench.

[stickdog]

16. Lott wants to respond, but he can't seem to come up with a clever

re-tort.

[TaleWgnDg]

13. Pppssssstttt, hey Trent, you know as well as I know that your

insurance company will not pay out unless it's sued. Your insurance company had absolutely no intention of "honoring" its insurance contract with you. This is business as usual. And, that's why these insurance companies pay-off *ssholes like you in congress to "reform" tort litigation as to class action lawsuits as well as sponsor other corporate-friendly legislature.

A low-life like you hasta hire a plaintiffs attorney? Pity, huh? And, it's your brother-in-law's law firm? What a damn hypocrite!

[underpants]

35. DING!

We have a winner. Thank you for stating the obvious. They didn't get rich printing checks for crying out loud.

BTW- the fact that "Dick Scruggs" is going to be mentioned on the national news is pure bonus.

[No Exit]

46. Yeah!!! Hey, but Dickie Scruggs has been on this since day one

He had to be--he had property wiped out by the hurricane, just like everyone else down there.

I remember shortly after the storm he said he was preparing litigation (yes, he had already had indications that the insurance company was going to try to screw him). And he, being an eevil plaintiff's lawyer, said he would take other persons' cases.

After all, Scruggs is not hobbled by being a tuxedo-clad, grey-poupon-eating, sphincter-clenched, pasty white repukelican PRICK.

[MidwestTransplant]

14. BS that he is filing it for others too. It's for him alone. Like he

could give a shit about others. Maybe some Democratic Sen. should suggest legislation to protect insurance companies from lawsuits like the Republicans did for gun makers. Let's see how Lott reacts to that one.

[stickdog]

15. Can you say "complete hypocrite"? I knew you could.

That's a bibulous lawsuit if one ever existed!

[radfringe]

18. according to Robertson

Katrina was an act of God - aren't insurance companies exempt from paying out for acts of God?

[No Exit]

41. You must be reading from the insurance adjustors' manual

Because that sounds just like the sort of things they tell people!

Take this case in point:

My friends had a house in N.O. that, due to the levee breach on a canal, flooded with 12 feet of water (went up to the ceiling, didn't really wet things in the attic.) The water sat in the house for 2-3 weeks.

The insurance adjustor (one of many, hired specially by insurance companies to handle the flood of claims) said, "well, the part above the attic isn't damaged, so the house is not a total loss, so I don't think that would pay the policy limits..."

So, I told my friend, you see, you have to simply pluck the top part of the house off the nasty, moldy, watery bottom part of the house, and then you save the top part, and when you've constructed a new bottom part for your house, you then just put the undamaged top part right on there!

[radfringe]

51. yup

just jackup the attic/roof and put a new house under it...

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

52. read your policy

most do not exclude acts of god, or if they do they specify what that means. That is very old fashioned language.

Most do very clearly exclude flood, and clearly define what is meant by flood, which includes storm surge. That's why people have a federal flood program they can purchase if they want to buy coverage for that exposure.

Its actually pretty clear cut.

[Tsiyu]

22. Nice

After all those lectures the GOP gave us about Tort reform and frivolous lawsuits, and the evil of lawyers, I'm NOT shocked.

[wicket]

23. FRIVOLOUS LAWSUIT!!!!

These Republican assholes are such freakin' hypocrites. :grr: :grr: :grr:

[newscott]

28. I second that. He should ge jail time for wasting the government's time!!

[Gman]

24. Lott is a complete idiot. He screwed his self

by pushing for tort reform.

Makes Randi Rhodes look real good with her mantra of people voting against their own self interests.

[AlCzervik]

26. If Lott has to sue can you imagine where that leaves a non-senator?

people, regular people are going to get screwed.

[No Exit]

42. It leaves the non-senator living in a hotel room (if he's lucky),

waiting for a tiny FEMA trailer, while meanwhile, FEMA trailers are sitting locked but empty for no apparent reason. Oh--and he's sitting there w/o a way to earn money, b/c his employer in N.O. or on the MS gulf coast is out of business due to catastrophic hurricane damage, and due to the fact that the Small Business Administration hasn't processed the employer's form yet, to decide if the employer is entitled to a wonderful LOAN (as in, "must be repaid").

[banana republican]

30. Lott Sues Insurer for Storm Damages

Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott and his wife sued State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. to force the insurer to pay for damage to their house in Pascagoula on the Gulf of Mexico, which was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina.

<snip>

The lawsuit was filed by Richard Scruggs, a plaintiffs' lawyer who previously has battled companies over tobacco and asbestos issues, and also the senator's brother-in-law. Messrs. Lott and Scruggs were neighbors, and both men owned homes along the same stretch of waterfront road in Pascagoula. After the storm, little more than rubble and the foundation remained of Mr. Lott's house, just yards from the Gulf; Katrina gutted Mr. Scruggs's house, leaving gaping holes in the walls and pushing an outbuilding more than a block inland.

The suit says that State Farm wouldn't cover Mr. Lott's total loss because it was caused by a "storm surge" from the Gulf, not wind. The suit asserts that the insurance policy was supposed to cover losses from "storm systems" declared to be hurricanes by the National Weather Service. The suit argues that the policy's "definition of hurricane and its use of the term 'storm system' contemplates not only damage from hurricane winds, but also...'storm surge.' "

on edit: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113469211744223982.html?mod=DLW

[Lefty48197]

31. Frivilous lawsuit. We need immunity for insurance companies.

.

[ET Awful]

32. Fuckin' hypocrite. n/t

[hippiechick]

33. If he wins ... it should be precedent for everyone else ...

... in the hurricane(s) path(s) who's insurance company has tried to dodge them.

[JudyM]

34. At least it'll distract him somewhat from persistently screwing us. n/t

[No Exit]

47. True... the downside is, it may also distract him from screwing

his nemesis, "Brutus" Frist, the animal lover.

Trentie's been doing a pretty good job of embarrassing Little Lord Fauntleroy Frist lately.

[SoCalDem]

54. Isn't the 'surge" wind-driven?

Would there BE a surge, without the winds of the hurricane?

[underpants]

36. Dickie Scruggs

:rofl:

[No Exit]

39. PROFESSIONAL PLAINTIFF AND HIS SLEAZY LAWYERS

SET OUT TO GOUGE THE NICE INSURANCE COMPANIES!

They must be stopped because don't you know, "We are ALL paying for these frivolous lawsuits!!!"

What? We ALL pay for them??? I don't understand! I thought it was the INSURANCE COMPANY that would have to pay?

"Yes, but then we ALL pay in the form of paying increased premiums!"

Oh, so the lawsuits mandate that the insurance companies make us all pay a bit more on our premiums to pay off the judgment??

"No, but the insurance companies choose to raise our premiums to make sure they can still be profitable."

It's not a forced premium hike--it's a voluntary premium hike??

"Yes, voluntary, but it's all because of these FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS".

But... don't the insurance companies have OODLES of good investments which give them regular profits??

"Well... yes...

So why do we ALL have to pay higher premiums just b/c of one person's suit?

"Well... we don't... but the insurance companies choose to up our premiums..."

[baldguy]

50. If he wins his award should be capped at 10% of the value of his loss

Can't put those insurance companies in danger of loosing money.

[HuffleClaw]

53. his politics aside...

...i see no problem with this. insurance companies ALWAYS try to screw folks after a natural disaster, no matter who they are. iirc, one of the regional governers had to threaten action to make the insurance companies back off threats to not pay folks.