San Francisco Injury Lawyer Blog

Claim Information Control Bill Proposed to Help Customers of Insolvent Insurers

March 16, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

law%20books.jpg As shown in recent blog postings, our San Francisco insurance attorneys follow all the relevant legal and political developments in insurance law, particularly as they affect Californians. This blog has covered potential changes to laws relating to automobile insurance, flood insurance, and insurance coverage for autism, to name a few. Another interesting development in California insurance law is Assembly Bill 1734 introduced by Assemblyman Curt Hagman in February.

This bill proposes to provide choices to policyholders when an insurance company becomes insolvent and is liquidated by the state. It also would, if enacted, provide the policyholders with information regarding their claims, the financial security of the company in liquidation, and the expected length and result of the liquidation. In general, liquidation of these companies and sorting out payment for claims and paying creditors can take a decade or more.

When an insurance company becomes insolvent, the Insurance Commissioner terminates the business by cancelling policies and not issuing or renewing policies. Then, if it is determined that the company cannot be rehabilitated or saved, the assets of the company are transferred to the California Department of Insurance’s Conservation and Liquidation Office (CLO) (http://www.caclo.org/perl/), which sells off the assets to pay policyholder claims and other creditors. The CLO operates as a fiduciary for the claimants until the assets are dispersed and the claims are paid. California also has the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) and the California Life and Health Insurance Guarantee Association (CLHIGA) to help meet the obligations of insolvent insurers through reviewing and paying claims. When a claim is either not covered by one of these organizations or it exceeds the maximum amount (except in worker’s comp cases, CIGA has a $500,000 limit), the CLO steps in with the proceeds from the asset sales.

Alameda County Considers Drug Disposal Measure

March 14, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

Medication saves lives. Our Oakland pharmaceutical lawyer knows we are lucky to live in an age where so many health ailments can be managed or cured through the use of medication. However, we also know that medications can be dangerous, especially when unused medicines are not properly disposed.

As your Oakland dangerous drugs law firm, The Brod Firm has been following developments in Alameda County regarding drug disposal. According to The Oakland Tribune, Alameda County supervisors have elected to delay passage of an ordinance that would have required pharmaceutical companies to take back unused products. The ordinance, which was expected to be approved, would have made the county the first local government to require such steps. The delay means the provision will not come to a vote until June, at the earliest.

Currently, there are 128 drop-off sites in the Bay Area at which residents can dispose of unwanted medications. In 2009, area residents used the sites to dispose of 60,000 pounds of pharmaceuticals. The Alameda proposal would have mandated that drug manufacturers create detailed plans to collect both prescription and over-the-counter medicines. The estimated cost of complying with the proposal is $200,000. Business representatives from pharmaceutical companies and trade associations argued that the proposal was premature and would have been ineffective. They suggested the proposal would increase costs and would also cause companies to halt business in the county.

The Importance of Healthy Workplaces: The Asbestos Example

March 12, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

America is a land of opportunity where hard work should earn you a good life. Unfortunately, or San Francisco workplace injury lawyer knows that too many of our residents are subject to dangerous working conditions. These conditions include hazardous chemicals that can cause a myriad of health problems, some of which don’t appear until many years later.

One of the most publicized substances that has led to countless work-related sicknesses is asbestos. There are six major types of asbestos and the substance was widely used for many years because of its commercially beneficial properties. Asbestos fibers are resistant to heat and many chemicals, leading to use in a range of construction elements as well as textiles, cement, and protective coatings. Historians believe asbestos was used as far back as the first century A.D. and asbestos was a popular building material as recently as the 1970s and 1980s.

Many people have become ill as a result of asbestos exposure, including illnesses due to inhaling asbestos fibers at the workplace. Three major health problems associated with asbestos exposure are:

Doctor Charged with Murder After Patient Overdose

March 10, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

Several months ago, Dr. Conrad Murray was convicted of involuntary manslaughter for the role he played in bringing about the death of pop sensation Michael Jackson in 2009. That case was one of several similar cases that demonstrated California’s new resolve to go after irresponsible doctors more aggressively than in the past. Since that time, charges have been filed against other doctors throughout the state.

Our San Francisco wrongful death lawyer learned this week of a recent case in which charges were filed against a doctor, signifying an even stronger hand being brought to bear against those in the medical profession who misuse their authority as doctors. The case involves a doctor from the San Francisco bay area named Hsiu-Ying “Lisa” Tseng, who lives in the Bay Area. The doctor has been charged with murder in the deaths of three different young men between the ages of 21 and 28. All three died by overdosing on prescription medications that Tseng had prescribed for them. It appears that authorities believe Tseng was prescribing drugs with the knowledge that they were going to be used for recreational use. According to an article from CBS San Francisco, one of the young men reportedly drove all the way from Arizona just to get a prescription from Tseng.

While the murder case has only just begun and will likely continue on for at least a few months, if not longer, our San Francisco wrongful death lawyer knows that its outcome may mean more to the families of these young men than whether or not someone is held criminally responsible for their deaths. However, local residents should be aware that a criminal case is wholly distinct from a the civil case that might be filed in the case.

Amtrak Train Collides with Big Rig

March 9, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

RR%20stop.jpg An Amtrak train smashed into a big rig that was partially stopped on the tracks on Thursday, March 8 according to the ABC Local News. The big rig was stopped at a traffic signal but did not realize that he back end of his truck was still on the tracks. The railroad arms came down on the back of the truck and the oncoming train repeatedly honked an alarm. The big rig did not move in time and the train was unable to avoid crashing into it.

The train engineer was sent to the hospital with a back injury and five passengers were treated for minor injuries. The driver of the big rig was cited.

Truck drivers go through training to learn how to handle loaded eighteen wheelers and obtain their Commercial Driver’s License. Trucking companies are concerned with driver safety, especially because they may be liable for damage or injury caused by employee drivers. The Federal Department of Transportation has put limits on the hours a truck operator can drive and the California Department of Motor Vehicles requires that a Commercial Driver’s License applicant pass a medical examination. Despite high standards for drivers, the number of trucking accidents has risen 20% over the last twenty years. The number one reason for these accidents is driver error, as was the case in Thursday’s collision.

Even when drivers do not follow protocol set out by their employers, the employer is still liable for the employee’s actions while driving a company vehicle. This legal theory is called respondeat superior and presumes that an employer holds authority over its employees and is therefore responsible for their actions.

In the past, shipping companies tried to avoid liability by putting distance between itself and its employees and even the big rigs themselves. Companies would lease trucks instead of buying them and claim that they were not liable because they did not actually own the truck involved in an accident. In other cases, companies limited driving positions to independent contract work, and claimed that the drivers were not employees in the strict sense of the word. In the 2011 court case, Sperl v. Robinson, an Illinois Appeals Court struck down that argument. Additionally, the federal government passed regulations to end those defenses.
Continue Reading ›

California Takes Action Against AIG Subsidiary for Mishandling of Fire Claims

March 9, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

As San Francisco insurance attorneys, we know one of the most devastating loses is one’s home. When something takes away a home, everything is upended and we need our insurance providers to come to our aide quickly so we can move on with our lives. Unfortunately, that is often when insurance companies stall and engage in unscrupulous and illegal behavior.

This week, California insurance regulators under the Department of Insurance have filed three actions against an American International Group Inc. (AIG) owned subsidiary company, New York based New Hampshire Insurance Co, over how it handled claims from that 2008 Sayre fires that devastated over 11,000 acres in the Los Angeles area in what has been dubbed the worst loss of homes due to fire in the city’s history. On that horrible November day, 600 structures were destroyed, leading the Mayor of Los Angeles and the Governor of California to declare a state of emergency. At the Oakridge Mobile Home Park alone 480 mobile homes were totally destroyed, and New Hampshire Insurance covered 370 of them with Mobile Homeowners Policies.

In the months after the Sayre fires, the Department of Insurance received numerous complaints about the insurance company’s handling of claims and investigated those complaints. The Department eventually cited New Hampshire and another subsidiary, York Risk Services Group Inc, with 125 violations of the California Insurance Code with unfair or deceptive claims practices in failing to diligently handle claims. Each of these violations, if substantiated, would have a civil penalty of $5,000 per act, raised to $10,000 if the act was willful. Department general counsel Adam M. Cole stated to reporters this week that, “We expect insurers and their agents to be thoroughly diligent in handling claims, especially at times of devastation such as the Sayre fire. The allegations in this case reflect a troubling lack of attention to consumer needs by New Hampshire Insurance Company.”

California Residents Must Protect Legal Rights Following Refinery Injuries

March 7, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

One business that is booming, both in California and throughout the country, is the oil and gas industry. New drilling and refining techniques have been mastered in recent years which make it possible for the first time to reach certain energy sources that were previously unavailable. These developments may be good news for the local economy, but our California refinery injury lawyer understands that coupled with the benefits is a need to ensure the safety of these sites. There are far too many examples in the past of explosions and similar preventable accidents related to the industry which has severely hurt and killed local residents.

The need to maintain a focus on safety is made more prevalent by news of shake-ups in the local industry. According to Reuters, BP is planning to sell two of its five U.S. refineries, including one in California. The California refinery is located in Carson and handled 253,000 barrels of oil per day. The move comes just as BP ends a three-year probation period stemming from a deadly oil refinery explosion in 2005 that killed fifteen people and injured many others.

Our area is no stranger to the dangers of oil refinery plants. Many nearby residents, for example, may have stories highlighting the dangers of the nearby Chevron Refinery in Richmond. In 1999, a large explosion rocked the refinery, sending a mushroom cloud over the plant and forcing area residents to remain inside to avoid possible contamination. Several emergency responders were also injured in that blast. The seriousness of the explosion was verified by the fact that an amazing 1,200 residents from the East Bay area were forced to go to the emergency room over potential ill effects of being exposed to dangerous fumes from the plant.

The Attorney’s Role in Negotiating Claims with Your Insurance Company

March 6, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

A police car crashed into a San Francisco home on March 6 when it swerved to avoid a turning car and lost control. The two police officers occupying the vehicle were taken to the hospital with minor injuries. Meanwhile, the homeowner, Margarita Gomez, was inside when the officers crashed into the garage. According to SF Gate, Mrs. Gomez heard screeching outside and was bracing for the sounds of a collision, but instead was shocked by the noise of a car slamming into her home.

Luckily, no one in the house was injured. However, Mrs. Gomez must now wait for the insurance adjuster to come out and evaluate her claim for the extensive property damage. Claimants like Mrs. Gomez should keep in mind that the adjuster works for the insurance company and not for them. The insurance company has an incentive to resolve the claim as quickly as possible, which sounds good for claimants, but claimants’ desire to receive the claim money quickly makes them susceptible to pressure to accept a relatively low offer in order to move the claim along. Other common tactics reported by Hector Quiroga, J.D. include, calling at inconvenient times to rush the claimant and also assigning multiple agents to one case so that claimants must explain their position multiple times and leaving them with possibly incongruent answers. Agents may also take the value of the claim out of context by giving examples of what the claimant can buy with the money, instead of the discussing the actual value of the claim.

If you have submitted a claim to an insurance company, NOLO recommends approach any offers with caution. If another party is at fault you will likely be dealing with that party’s insurance company In that case, you may have to argue who the other party’s liability for the damage and whether you contributed to the accident, on top of the actual dollar amount of damages. Before accepting any insurance offers over the phone, you should hang up and think over the offer and whether it really covers the damages and other hidden costs you incurred. If injuries were involved, you should roughly calculate past and future lost wages and pain and suffering. If the claim is unacceptable, but the insurance company is unyielding or using questionable tactics, you might want to consult an attorney to negotiate with the insurance company for you.
Continue Reading ›

Careless Driving Accidents in The Bay Area

March 5, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

Our San Francisco car crash lawyer sees the victims of careless driving all too often. Driving is a serious responsibility but too many people take it too lightly and treat cars as toys rather than respecting the powerful and potentially dangerous force of a car.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported on a San Francisco car accident that took place in the early morning hours on Sunday March 3, 2012. In the incident, an SUV jumped over the curb and landed in the San Francisco Bay. A thirty-eight year old man named Agatito Hernandez, was reportedly driving the vehicle and doing “donuts” immediately prior to the Fort Mason area accident. The driver and his three teenage passengers escaped without injury. Hernandez has been charged with multiple counts including reckless driving and child endangerment.

It is remarkable that no one was harmed in this accident. If you have had the poor luck to be involved in an accident with a reckless driver, it is important to know your rights. Medical care should always be the first priority but it is also important to document the accident with photos if possible. You should take care to notify your insurance company in a timely fashion. Your policy will likely require notification in a specified time period and failure to meet this requirement can result in the denial of an otherwise valid claim.

California Building Code Requirements that Keep Stairways Safe

March 3, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

Slips and falls are by nature unexpected- but the causes are often predictable. Some of the more common reasons for falls include pitfalls, slippery surfaces, obstructions of walkway areas, and stairs. Stairs are one of the most common culprits because they have multiple surfaces on which to slip and stepping to the next level forces the body off balance.

The California Uniform Building Code sets out specific requirements for residential and commercial stairs in order to make their everyday use safer. In order to be comfortable for the average human’s height and gait, requirements for stairs are that they be at least 10 inches deep and 4 inches tall, but no taller than 7 3/4 inches. The human brain automatically adjusts to a repetitive walking patter, such as the space between steps. Therefore, the difference between each individual steps’ measurements may not have more than a 3/8 inch variance from the other steps. To accommodate the height and weight of both humans and their belongings, there must be a clearance space above the surface of the stair of at least 6 feet 8 inches and be able to support a 300 pound load.

In addition, all stairs with more than four risers must have a handrail installed for the length of the stairs. Handrails may not obstruct the stairs by more than 3 1/2 inches and they must support a 200 pound load. Stairs that are not enclosed on one or both sides must have a guardrail at least 36 inches tall to protect from falls over the side. City ordinances may have stricter requirements and should be researched as well.

Property owners have a duty to maintain stairways to prevent loose handrails or well-worn surfaces that leave stairs slippery or uneven. If a problem arises, the property owner should put up a warning sign until the problem can be fixed. Stairways should be well lit to increase visibility and prevent potential trips.

Serious falls can result in traumatic brain injury, broken bones, lacerations and contusions, or even paralysis. A slip and fall victim who would like to pursue a civil action in order to recover costs associated with the fall, such as medical expenses and lost wages should do a basic review of California law to determine if the property owner may be liable for injuries sustained. A slip and fall victim may also recover money damages for pain and suffering.

According to Nolo Press, in order to bring a successful action against the entity in charge of stair maintenance a plaintiff must prove one of the following:

The property owner caused the slippery or dangerous surface or item, to be underfoot.
The property owner or an employee knew of the dangerous surface but did nothing about it.
The property owner should have known of the dangerous surface because a “reasonable” person taking care of the property would have discovered and resolved the dangerous situation.

In addition, the defendant may avoid some or all liability if the plaintiff’s own actions or carelessness contributed to the fall.
Continue Reading ›