IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags geico , hpv , insurance , insurance companies

Reply
Old 5th October 2021, 12:44 PM   #1
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,957
GEICO might need to pay millions to woman who contracted HPV while in a car

//Mods: I went back and forth on whether to put this here, social issues, or somewhere else. If the discussion veers off to one side feel free to move.//

Quote:
The insurance company GEICO are right now embroiled in a sordid affair involving a man and a woman known in court documents as M.B. and M.O. The latter has been seeking damages related to contracting HPV, the most common sexually transmitted infection in the U.S. She says this was the result of having unprotected sex with M.B. in his car in late 2017, when he supposedly knew he was positive for the virus but had not told her. M.O. received her diagnosis in 2018. Because the vehicle was insured by GEICO, in February of this year she demanded a liability settlement from the company to the tune of $1 million — or else she’d file for damages.
Link: https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/...tm_source=digg
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 5th October 2021 at 12:46 PM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 01:02 PM   #2
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 59,399
That doesn't make sense at all. I'm pretty sure GEICO is smart enough to write insurance contracts that don't make them liable for everything people put in a car or do in a car.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 01:04 PM   #3
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 25,046
I mean, he paid for “comprehensive coverage.”
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 01:09 PM   #4
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 59,399
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I mean, he paid for “comprehensive coverage.”
If that's true, then GEICO's actuaries have probably already factored this payout into their calculations, and for GEICO this is just another Tuesday. And also the customer's insurance premiums are about to go up.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 01:33 PM   #5
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 15,453
deleted

Last edited by Bob001; 5th October 2021 at 01:35 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 02:33 PM   #6
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 25,046
Also, her demand is for $1million, so the headline is misleading.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 03:08 PM   #7
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 19,118
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I mean, he paid for “comprehensive coverage.”
If he comprehended condoms, he'd have been covered both literally and metaphorically.
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 03:12 PM   #8
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Also, her demand is for $1million, so the headline is misleading.
Might want to read the article.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 03:16 PM   #9
xjx388
Moderator
Moderator
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,883
I’m quite sure this is going nowhere. It would be a bad precedent to settle this even as a nuisance thing.

Why not just sue the guy directly?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 03:19 PM   #10
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 59,399
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Might want to read the article.
Then again, you might not. I lost several brain cells trying to parse out a simple explanation of whatever the hell this is supposed to be about.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 03:43 PM   #11
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Then again, you might not. I lost several brain cells trying to parse out a simple explanation of whatever the hell this is supposed to be about.
Yeah, there's that too. But yet another person has shown up that might benefit from reading the article if they really are curious about the question they are asking.

Last edited by RecoveringYuppy; 5th October 2021 at 03:46 PM.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 03:45 PM   #12
SuburbanTurkey
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Null
Posts: 15,479
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
//Mods: I went back and forth on whether to put this here, social issues, or somewhere else. If the discussion veers off to one side feel free to move.//



Link: https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/...tm_source=digg
I'm sending you a 1 million dollar demand letter for tricking me into reading this totally substance-free clickbait.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 03:48 PM   #13
BowlOfRed
Master Poster
 
BowlOfRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,130
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I’m quite sure this is going nowhere. It would be a bad precedent to settle this even as a nuisance thing.
I agree with you. In fact the article has this little tidbit on bad precedent.

Quote:
In 1985, Stewart Perry, a Minneapolis lawyer, secured a $25,000 settlement from Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company for his client, who had contracted herpes from a policyholder when they’d had sex in his house. Though it never went to court, Perry publicized the victory, which led to similar actions and, eventually, the homeowner insurance companies writing exclusions for “communicable disease” into their policy language so they couldn’t be held liable in such cases.

Quote:
Why not just sue the guy directly?
Cuz he's not as rich as GEICO. In fact the article says that part of the GEICO claim is that the two are colluding to get money from the company. It seems to say that the pair went to arbitration and there (without GEICO present) obtained a judgment for damages that she has to collect from GEICO.
BowlOfRed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 03:53 PM   #14
xjx388
Moderator
Moderator
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,883
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Yeah, there's that too. But yet another person has shown up that might benefit from reading the article if they really are curious about the question they are asking.

Or maybe you could just tell us what you think others are missing?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 03:53 PM   #15
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 59,399
I'm betting the arbitrator knows it's not binding on GEICO. How could it be?
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 04:09 PM   #16
xjx388
Moderator
Moderator
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,883
GEICO might need to pay millions to woman who contracted HPV while in a car

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Or maybe you could just tell us what you think others are missing?

And let’s be clear: there are no answers in the article as it’s written by an admittedly non-legal person who is relating this more as a piece of gossip than a legal analysis.

I have questions, dammit! What the hell is this wonky “arbitration” that “awarded” millions of dollars that “only” GEICO can pay. That ain’t how that works, as far as I know. Any award would be against the dude. Insurance might cover the dude; but, it’s a stretch to say that an auto insurance -specifically - owes anything.

Nothing in that article is remotely an answer to reasonable questions.
__________________
Hello.

Last edited by xjx388; 5th October 2021 at 04:10 PM.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 04:31 PM   #17
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,500
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
And let’s be clear: there are no answers in the article as it’s written by an admittedly non-legal person who is relating this more as a piece of gossip than a legal analysis.

I have questions, dammit! What the hell is this wonky “arbitration” that “awarded” millions of dollars that “only” GEICO can pay. That ain’t how that works, as far as I know. Any award would be against the dude. Insurance might cover the dude; but, it’s a stretch to say that an auto insurance -specifically - owes anything.

Nothing in that article is remotely an answer to reasonable questions.
M.O. was "awarded a judgement" against M.B. He can't pay it, so "“only” GEICO can pay". M.B. is going to have to file a claim with Geico. Not being able to pay $5.2 million is going to play hell with his credit score.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 05:26 PM   #18
marting
Illuminator
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,310
Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto View Post
M.O. was "awarded a judgement" against M.B. He can't pay it, so "“only” GEICO can pay". M.B. is going to have to file a claim with Geico. Not being able to pay $5.2 million is going to play hell with his credit score.
Probably not. In the USA there was a settlement a few years back with multiple States AGs that judgments re things not credit related would not be reported by the credit reporting agencies.

So M.B.s credit shouldn't be affected.
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th October 2021, 08:28 PM   #19
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,500
Originally Posted by marting View Post
Probably not. In the USA there was a settlement a few years back with multiple States AGs that judgments re things not credit related would not be reported by the credit reporting agencies.

So M.B.s credit shouldn't be affected.
Putting the E in ISF once more. Tnx.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2021, 09:24 AM   #20
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 25,046
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Might want to read the article.
Wow, what’s with the threats of violence?

I am not ever going to read that article. I will read the report my broker puts out if there is a judgement that impacts the exclusions on my coverage.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2021, 05:47 PM   #21
mgidm86
Philosopher
 
mgidm86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 7,876
I'm sure I saw in my Geico policy that I am required to wear a seatbelt when driving, and a condom during sex in the vehicle. I think "unprotected" sex would be the issue, not that I think this is going anywhere. Hello, you are supposed to wear a condom dumbass.
__________________
Trolls are a protected class here.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2021, 07:24 PM   #22
Suddenly
No Punting
 
Suddenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not In Follansbee
Posts: 4,854
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post

I have questions, dammit!
Alright. I'm here for this. I have some idea of what this is about.
Quote:

What the hell is this wonky “arbitration” that “awarded” millions of dollars
It was in any practical sense almost certainly a sham, but possibly legally binding because US arbitration law is bonkers because corporations want to use it to avoid lawsuits. I don't have a lot of sympathy for an insurance company as to this.
Quote:

that “only” GEICO can pay. That ain’t how that works, as far as I know. Any award would be against the dude.
Sort of but not quite. It is an artful sham in that it includes an agreement that the woman will only take what can be indemnified. That part of this is sort of the sneaky bit, but not all that uncommon in less interesting cases.
Quote:

Insurance might cover the dude; but, it’s a stretch to say that an auto insurance -specifically - owes anything.

.
That's where it gets weird. It might all be nonsense, but the argument would be that this arbitration award is a legally binding debt and the insurance company has agreed to indemnify passenger injuries from use/operation of a car, and there is an argument that people bone in cars and absent a specific coverage exception that is that.

(A key bit is her claim that he knew he had the virus and she did not know, which brings in negligence and even intentional tort theories. That's where the liability comes from.)

So a woman was wrongfully injured in a car at the hands of the insured. The insured has conceded fault, and the injured is trying to collect from the insurance. As far as I can tell a state court has honored the arbitration award.

GEICO is now in federal court trying to overturn the state arbitration judgement as being a legal fiction cooked up by the parties to cash in. They are, in a non-technical way, probably right about that. Just that their problem is some corporate friendly law they've probably used to... err... screw people with is now, well, screwing them.
Suddenly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2022, 09:00 AM   #23
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 42,771
Car insurer Geico may have to pay $5m after woman contracts STI in a vehicle

A woman may be in for a $5.2m payout after she allegedly contracted a sexually transmitted infection while having sex in a car.

The US woman, identified in court files as 'MO', said she caught the human papillomavirus (HPV) from having sex with her then-partner in his car.

This week, the Missouri Court of Appeals upheld a judgment that awarded MO a hefty settlement - to be paid by Geico, which insured the vehicle.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61763333
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2022, 09:08 AM   #24
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 59,399
I bet it has less to do with the acts performed in the car, and more to do with the scope of the insurance policy and its exact wording.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2022, 09:21 AM   #25
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 63,193
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I bet it has less to do with the acts performed in the car, and more to do with the scope of the insurance policy and its exact wording.
I think it has less to do with that, even: the news stories don't go into the details of it but the original finding was from an arbitration, not a court case. It sounds like Geico didn't bother defending themselves in actual court. I suspect it would have gone differently had this gone through the normal process.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2022, 10:55 AM   #26
Suddenly
No Punting
 
Suddenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not In Follansbee
Posts: 4,854
There is a whole thread about this case where I remember going beat by beat through this. It's not new.

The upshot is that the insurance industry in particular and corporations in general have been through various means such as "Tort Reform" propaganda managed to get a bunch of laws in place that more or less force people away from the court system and into arbitration. In this case someone figured out how to turn that machinery back on an insurance company by having what amounts to a sham arbitration that as I recall was within the text of the law.

Just that when an individual uses these sorts of loopholes to screw a corporation it's news and we are meant to wring our hands over it. When a corporation uses it to screw individuals it's just another Tuesday.
Suddenly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2022, 11:00 AM   #27
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 15,453
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I think it has less to do with that, even: the news stories don't go into the details of it but the original finding was from an arbitration, not a court case. It sounds like Geico didn't bother defending themselves in actual court. I suspect it would have gone differently had this gone through the normal process.

There are other reports that say exactly that. GEICO didn't take the action seriously because it didn't imagine it could lose.
Quote:
The panel also wrote that Geico could have defended its interests by entering a defense of the insured individual. "GEICO did not take advantage of this opportunity, and instead denied coverage and refused to defend Insured," the opinion said.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/09/us/ge...uri/index.html

What's not clear to me is how she could have proved that she didn't acquire the HPV either from that man during an encounter in some other place, or from some other person entirely. It sounds like the arbitrator really wanted to stick it to GEICO.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2022, 11:20 AM   #28
Suddenly
No Punting
 
Suddenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not In Follansbee
Posts: 4,854
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
What's not clear to me is how she could have proved that she didn't acquire the HPV either from that man during an encounter in some other place, or from some other person entirely. It sounds like the arbitrator really wanted to stick it to GEICO.
Well, yes. It was by any normal conversation criteria a sham. The problem is that the laws w/r/t arbitration are so psychotically in favor of arbitration that GEICO is pretty much legally SOL.

At some point a court may apply the principle that only corporations are allowed to use these laws as a weapon, but maybe not.
Suddenly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2022, 12:11 PM   #29
TellyKNeasuss
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,770
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
It sounds like the arbitrator really wanted to stick it to GEICO.
Perhaps the arbitrator has suffered through as many GEICO ads as I have.
__________________
"Facts are stupid things."
Ronald Reagan


TellyKNeasuss is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2022, 12:14 PM   #30
TellyKNeasuss
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,770
What I don't understand (beyond how the arbitrator came up with $5.2 million in damages) is that all my insurance policies have a stated maximum liability amount. Is the stated maximum liability on the policy not the most that the insurance company is actually obligated to pay out or does GEICO write policies with unlimited liability?
__________________
"Facts are stupid things."
Ronald Reagan


TellyKNeasuss is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2022, 09:04 AM   #31
TellyKNeasuss
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,770
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I think it has less to do with that, even: the news stories don't go into the details of it but the original finding was from an arbitration, not a court case. It sounds like Geico didn't bother defending themselves in actual court. I suspect it would have gone differently had this gone through the normal process.
According to an article in the ABA Journal, GEICO's position apparently is that they didn't know that the case was being heard by an arbitrator until they saw in Missouri's online case tracking system that the woman had filed a petition to have the arbitrator's ruling affirmed by a court. They filed a motion to intervene in the case, which was granted but the judge approved the arbitrator's decision the very same day.

https://www.abajournal.com/web/artic...er-court-says/
__________________
"Facts are stupid things."
Ronald Reagan


TellyKNeasuss is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2022, 10:02 AM   #32
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 18,022
There is a great Opening Arguments episode which explains the lawsuit.
Basically, Geico, according to their insurance contract, should have litigated the case, but refused to do so; that opened the door to arbitration, which can be for the entire amount of the Policy. The judge was right in giving the company a smackdown for using what amounts to intimidation to not even bother investigating the issue.

Note that so far Geico has to pay nothing - that will be another case between Geico and the insurance holder.
__________________
"When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me."

- Emo Philips
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2022, 11:01 AM   #33
Lithrael
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,360
I’m confused. Does this sort of thing mean, say, you can sue a guy’s car insurance if he stabbed you while you were both in the car?
Lithrael is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2022, 11:15 AM   #34
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 18,022
Originally Posted by Lithrael View Post
I’m confused. Does this sort of thing mean, say, you can sue a guy’s car insurance if he stabbed you while you were both in the car?
Depends on how the contract is written.
__________________
"When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me."

- Emo Philips
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2022, 11:18 AM   #35
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 59,399
Originally Posted by Lithrael View Post
I’m confused. Does this sort of thing mean, say, you can sue a guy’s car insurance if he stabbed you while you were both in the car?
Anybody can sue anyone for anything, pretty much. Whether or not the insurance company has to actually pay out on the claim depends on:

- What it actually says in the policy,

- Whether the judge or arbitrator agrees that the claim has merit, based on what the policy actually says, and

- Whether there is some legal loophole that compels the insurer to pay if they don't take certain steps to contest the claim.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are insurance policies that cover a very wide range of liabilities, with suitably large premiums to go with them.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2022, 12:51 PM   #36
TheGoldcountry
Philosopher
 
TheGoldcountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,800
It sounds like the judge smacked them down for ignoring the judicial process, not that the initial charge had merit.

Judges don't like people who play games with the legal system. They were trying to bully her and it didn't work.
__________________
I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten
I sometimes think the Bible was inspired by Satan to make God look bad. And then it backfired on Him when He underestimated the stupidity of religious ideologues. -MontagK505
TheGoldcountry is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2022, 04:08 PM   #37
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 63,193
Originally Posted by Lithrael View Post
I’m confused. Does this sort of thing mean, say, you can sue a guy’s car insurance if he stabbed you while you were both in the car?
Most insurance policies do not cover deliberate damage or malicious criminal acts. If you deliberately run over somebody your insurance can deny coverage, for example. (They may choose to pay out anyway, for PR reasons, but they wouldn't have to.)

Also excepted: damage caused by acts of war. This is more significant than is immediately apparent. There was a huge legal fuss over 9/11 because some insurance companies tried to get out of paying out based on the US government making statements about it having been an "act of war" and "declaring a war on terror". That rhetorical blather added up to a lot of billable hours for lawyers!
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2022, 12:22 PM   #38
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,543
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Most insurance policies do not cover deliberate damage or malicious criminal acts. If you deliberately run over somebody your insurance can deny coverage, for example. (They may choose to pay out anyway, for PR reasons, but they wouldn't have to.)

Also excepted: damage caused by acts of war. This is more significant than is immediately apparent. There was a huge legal fuss over 9/11 because some insurance companies tried to get out of paying out based on the US government making statements about it having been an "act of war" and "declaring a war on terror". That rhetorical blather added up to a lot of billable hours for lawyers!
There was also a big fuss over if the planes hitting the trade center was one event or two. Because there was a maximum payout per event
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2022, 02:12 PM   #39
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 15,453
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
There was also a big fuss over if the planes hitting the trade center was one event or two. Because there was a maximum payout per event
What was the resolution? I would think two different planes striking two different buildings at two different times would be two different events. But I'm not in the insurance industry.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2022, 04:02 AM   #40
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,543
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
What was the resolution? I would think two different planes striking two different buildings at two different times would be two different events. But I'm not in the insurance industry.
Not sure looking into it this seems the first most relevant source

"In relation to the unity of cause, the Tribunal had reasoned that “there were two separate causes because there were two successful hijackings of two separate aircraft, admittedly in execution of a dastardly plot to turn each of them into a guided missile each aimed at one of the two signature Towers of a single property complex.”

The Tribunal also had regard to the fact that both hijackings were part of an overarching plan, but as is clear from the authorities (notably the Dawson’s Field arbitration award), the Tribunal held that a plan cannot itself be an ‘event’ (although it might well be a ‘cause’, which was why the property losses were aggregated in the US case of World Trade Center Properties v Hartford Fire Insurance Co)."

https://www.hfw.com/Twin-Towers-Feb-13
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:14 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.