Wal-Mart sues accident vicitm to recoup insurance costs? - Blu-ray Forum

groovyone · 12-18-2007, 04:02 PM

This may be old news, but of interest to Wal-Mart shoppers:

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...ctimsCash.aspx

I didn't catch a date on the article, so my apologies if it has been posted before. Everyone may want to check their own insurance for such a clause!!

Mods can change the thread title to "Check your insurance for this clause" or something too. This was not intended as a bash WalMart thread, rather a be leery of what you sign warning!

mgonzo2u · 12-18-2007, 04:35 PM

Subrogation is important and good for you and me in regards to helping keep our own insurance premiums down that we have to pay the insurance company(ies).

To avoid awful care in case of catastrophic loss/injury, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE TO YOURSELF AND YOUR FAMILY to purchase the right kind of Long Term Care and Disability Insurance that YOU WILL RELY ON in case of accident.

Don't blame the man, blame yourself if you ever get left short.

/ rant by licensed insurance agent

victorvondoom88 · 12-18-2007, 07:13 PM

Why didn't wal-mart go after the tractor trailer company and not the employee. That is what is disgusting to me. I mean if she got a settlement then they where in the wrong not her.They should have been responsible for her med. bills.

mgonzo2u · 12-18-2007, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by victorvondoom88

Why didn't wal-mart go after the tractor trailer company and not the employee. That is what is disgusting to me. I mean if she got a settlement then they where in the wrong not her.They should have been responsible for her med. bills.

Read closely:

The tractor trailer insurance company paid the lady an insurance settlement that was to cover her medical expenses and other issues (pain and suffering, lost wages, etc).

Wal-Mart's insurance company also paid the ladies medical expenses (up front-FIRST).

The lady received a double dip of $ for her medical condition.

That is illegal by the way.

The Wal-Mart insurance company did what they are entitled to in getting that double dipped money back from her because the trucker insurance company was washed clean of any further liability. They paid the lady, the lady owed Wal-Marts insurance co.

End of story.

No big mean corporation to blame.

The big mean corporation is not keeping her down.

She's lucky fraud charges were not slapped on her.

quetzalcoatl · 12-18-2007, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by victorvondoom88

Why didn't wal-mart go after the tractor trailer company and not the employee. That is what is disgusting to me. I mean if she got a settlement then they where in the wrong not her.They should have been responsible for her med. bills.

Simple they have no standing with the trailer company. This is a very sad case but also a case where bad advice from a lawyer can really come back and bite you. Since they were in a case and had a lawyer they should have know about this so instead of settling for what they got they should have gone to court.

dakota81 · 12-18-2007, 07:41 PM

It seems harsh, but I think it's correct that the insurance of the trucking company should cover all the expenses, not Wal*Mart's insurance. Beyond that I don't know the details of the case or the law.

dialog_gvf · 12-18-2007, 08:20 PM

Her lawyer should have made sure the settlement covered the medical expenses AND her lost wages and pain and suffering.

Gee, 290K in legal fees and the lawyer didn't bother to read her employment contract?

Sue the lawyer for malpractice.

groovyone · 12-18-2007, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

Her lawyer should have made sure the settlement covered the medical expenses AND her lost wages and pain and suffering.

Gee, 290K in legal fees and the lawyer didn't bother to read her employment contract?

Sue the lawyer for malpractice.

That sounds about right. Quite an oversight on the paid professional's part.

mgonzo2u · 12-18-2007, 08:32 PM

Well, if the following quote from the husband of the afflicted is any indicator, these folks aren't working with a full deck to begin with:

"I don't understand why they need to do this," says Jim Shank on a recent visit to the nursing home, between shifts as a maintenance worker and running a tanning salon. "This girl needs the money more than they do."

*Yeah sure, just have nearly half a million dollars of WalMart's insurance plan money because the wife needs the money. Yeah, that's how it works in dem dare parts. Besides, they's a big ol corporation, they can give out charity like that to just about everyone. IDIOT!

tqlla · 12-19-2007, 05:38 AM

Its pretty cold blooded what Wal mart is doing. They are suing for everything they got, even though the settlement was for pain and suffering and medical costs.

Most likely the "medical costs" were future costs expected to be paid out of pocket by the family. Unfortunately, it looks like Wal mart is in the legal right.

What I dont understand is, Shouldnt settlements be broken out. IE 700K, 300K - pain and suffering, 200K lawyer fees, 300K Medical bills. In which case, Wal mart would legally only be able to get to the $300K designated for medical bills.

If you do get into a catastrophic accident talk to a lawyer suing for
1) Pain and suffering
2) legal Fees
3) Out of pocket Medical Fees(Those not covered by insurance).
4) Specifically list that any Medical fees paid by your insurance company is not a part of the settlement.

Hopefully, that will protect you(though I am no lawyer, so dont take my word as law)

Let your insurance company sue the party responsible.

12-18-2007, 04:02 PM	#1
groovyone Blu-ray Guru Member since:May 2007 Location:PSNetwork: groovyone	Wal-Mart sues accident vicitm to recoup insurance costs? This may be old news, but of interest to Wal-Mart shoppers: http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...ctimsCash.aspx I didn't catch a date on the article, so my apologies if it has been posted before. Everyone may want to check their own insurance for such a clause!! Mods can change the thread title to "Check your insurance for this clause" or something too. This was not intended as a bash WalMart thread, rather a be leery of what you sign warning! Last edited by groovyone; 12-18-2007 at 04:05 PM.

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
I am done with Wal-Mart.	Retail/Shopping	Kryptonic	11	11-05-2009 12:37 PM
UP $19.99 at Wal-mart	Blu-ray Movies - North America	uberblu-ray	1	11-02-2009 08:39 PM
Wal-Mart Online vs Wal-Mart In Store	Blu-ray Movies - North America	coachD	21	10-21-2008 03:59 PM

12-18-2007, 04:35 PM	#2
mgonzo2u Expert Member Member since:Jul 2007 Location:O.C. KOOK FOR LIFE Blu-ray collection:112	Subrogation is important and good for you and me in regards to helping keep our own insurance premiums down that we have to pay the insurance company(ies). To avoid awful care in case of catastrophic loss/injury, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE TO YOURSELF AND YOUR FAMILY to purchase the right kind of Long Term Care and Disability Insurance that YOU WILL RELY ON in case of accident. Don't blame the man, blame yourself if you ever get left short. / rant by licensed insurance agent

12-18-2007, 07:13 PM	#3
victorvondoom88 Expert Member Top contributor Member since:Jan 2007 Location:middle of nowere, IL. Home Theater Gallery:26 4K collection:39 Blu-ray collection:656	Why didn't wal-mart go after the tractor trailer company and not the employee. That is what is disgusting to me. I mean if she got a settlement then they where in the wrong not her.They should have been responsible for her med. bills.

12-18-2007, 07:41 PM	#6
dakota81 Expert Member Member since:Apr 2007	It seems harsh, but I think it's correct that the insurance of the trucking company should cover all the expenses, not Wal*Mart's insurance. Beyond that I don't know the details of the case or the law.

12-18-2007, 08:20 PM	#7
dialog_gvf Moderator Member since:Nov 2006 Location:Toronto Blu-ray collection:320	Her lawyer should have made sure the settlement covered the medical expenses AND her lost wages and pain and suffering. Gee, 290K in legal fees and the lawyer didn't bother to read her employment contract? Sue the lawyer for malpractice.

12-18-2007, 08:32 PM	#9
mgonzo2u Expert Member Member since:Jul 2007 Location:O.C. KOOK FOR LIFE Blu-ray collection:112	Well, if the following quote from the husband of the afflicted is any indicator, these folks aren't working with a full deck to begin with: "I don't understand why they need to do this," says Jim Shank on a recent visit to the nursing home, between shifts as a maintenance worker and running a tanning salon. "This girl needs the money more than they do." *Yeah sure, just have nearly half a million dollars of WalMart's insurance plan money because the wife needs the money. Yeah, that's how it works in dem dare parts. Besides, they's a big ol corporation, they can give out charity like that to just about everyone. IDIOT!

12-19-2007, 05:38 AM	#10
tqlla Active Member Member since:Sep 2007	Its pretty cold blooded what Wal mart is doing. They are suing for everything they got, even though the settlement was for pain and suffering and medical costs. Most likely the "medical costs" were future costs expected to be paid out of pocket by the family. Unfortunately, it looks like Wal mart is in the legal right. What I dont understand is, Shouldnt settlements be broken out. IE 700K, 300K - pain and suffering, 200K lawyer fees, 300K Medical bills. In which case, Wal mart would legally only be able to get to the $300K designated for medical bills. If you do get into a catastrophic accident talk to a lawyer suing for 1) Pain and suffering 2) legal Fees 3) Out of pocket Medical Fees(Those not covered by insurance). 4) Specifically list that any Medical fees paid by your insurance company is not a part of the settlement. Hopefully, that will protect you(though I am no lawyer, so dont take my word as law) Let your insurance company sue the party responsible.

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals