You can claim whatever you want. Whether people buy it is another thing.

Yeah, good luck making this stick in court.

That's what we get for living in a litigious society. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing.

I guess Great American Insurance Company isn't worried how literally evil this makes them appear. They're just not taking our concerns very seriously at all!

I smell a promotion! And a name change to GREATEST AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY IN THE WORLD. And an honerable mention to the nurse that started the fire for the most creative way of getting out of doing your work.
This is "thinking outside the box at it's finest"!

If I were the judge, I'd ask who responded to this type of pollution: the EPA or the fire department?

Yeah, I can't see this sticking either. Although Houston is pretty polluted; maybe the lawyer is banking that no one will be able to tell the difference?

The lesson GAIC is trying to imprint here is: make sure your employees wear gasoline-impregnated, flammable suits thus ensuring that if there's a fire, their families will get properly compensated when they die.

The insurance companies are in big trouble, since most of their income structure is based on investment.

Expect more crap like this in the next few years.

Damn you Great American Insurance Company

Happy Holidays! I betcha the guy who came up with this is just brimming over with the holiday spirit.

Great meaning large or immense, we mean it in the pejorative sense.

Okay- Free market zombies...Get ready to flame me.

This is why when you hear about "tort reform" or "out of control jury awards" you should call bullshit. The reason that this company is trying this tactic is simple : They think that they can get away with it and deny their contractural obligation to pay up. I guarantee you that they would not ever refund premiums if there had been no fire.

These guys had better hope that I am never sitting in judgement of this kind of defense. After I wet myself laughing,I would vote to give the plaintiffs as much as they were entitled and suggest that they sue again for insuring in bad faith...

Now , flame away,advocates for letting insurance companies do this...

Wow. Sounds like the law has just become a game to see what lawyer can stretch the letter of the law the thinnest and get a verdict in their favor.

There is no way this would pass if this went to a jury. Insurance companies must make the devil shed tears of happiness when he sees this stuff.

Another company in early contention for next year's Golden Turd?

Apparently Shakespeare was right about the lawyers.

What is the BONUS FUN FACT?

@Snarkysnake: free-market zombies? huh? you're just making a straw-man argument. This isn't really an issue with the free-market, relax.

@Snarkysnake: Whenever someone brings up the "McDonald's Coffee Case", bring this up.

Eddie Murphy in "Trading Places" pegged the commodities traders right - they (and insurance companies) *are* a bunch of bookies. And this one is acting like the Santonio Holmes catch wasn't a touchdown because the bookie said it wasn't...

@tsume: "BONUS FUN FACTCompany says smoke that killed 3 was 'pollution'"

Just like the bullet that maims the lawyer will be "physics".

I console myself by knowing that there's a special place in Hell reserved for people like this.

And hopefully they get there by ironic means, like, getting hit by a bus and having his health insurance provder claim it's an act of God.

@Snarkysnake: Winner winner chicken dinner.

This is exactly why tort reform is total bullshit. The people who buy that idea that we need tort reform hear some hack tell them we need it and cite the McDonald's coffee suit and that is all the further they understand the subject.

Insurance companies have become worse than any other business entity. Stonewalling and delaying legit claims is every day business. It is about the money, not honoring their contract. This is one industry that needs a major regulatory smack down.

@lincolnparadox: Yes they are. Investments are the basis of how they grow money beyond premiums paid in order to be able to pay out claims. There are some regulatory bodies that are supposed to assure solvency of insurance companies. I doubt that oversight is functioning any better than the rest has these days.

I would say you should check the ratings of any insurance company you do business with to make sure they are still going to be able to pay out claims but I wouldn't promise those are accurate either.

@BillyShears: It's a pre-existing condition - buses were running before the lawyer's insurance policy started!

Almost all breaches of contracts come without punitive damages. When someone breaches most contracts, they are only on the hook for the actual damages. Insurance is an exception to that rule. In many places, when an insurance company breaches a contract, they can be hit with punitive damages. This kind of case is a big reason why.

@dorianh49: Yay, they fixed it. The bonus fun fact is actually "The fire was started by a nurse who wanted to conceal she didn't complete paperwork on time."

I would like to "pollute" their office with a giant bag filled with farts.

@lalaland13: This would stick if Houston were in China.

@I am Mrs. Nerdtastic.: That's only because people can die from air pollution in china.

@lincolnparadox: Thankfully, there are statutory requirements, like setting aside a cash reserve on a per-policy basis. It doesn't guarantee that they'll be able to pay ALL policies, but it does eliminate the risk that they'll be unable to pay one big loss.

In theory anyway.

@Snarkysnake:

I am an employee of one of the F-100 insurance companies. This is the truth of the situation. Insurance companies have attorneys in house. These lawyers will dispute many claims. Insurance companies, if a case is brought to court, will lose 90% of the time. The hope is to settle out of court so that the claimant will avoid attorney fees and the payout reduced for the Ins Co.

"You know they've reintroduced the death penalty for insurance company directors?"
"Really?" said Arthur. "No I didn't. For what offence?"
Trillian frowned.
"What do you mean, 'offence?'"

- Douglas Adams, Mostly Harmless

@Snarkysnake:

Ya, god knows why we would want tort reform.

On a sidenote, anyone seen the recent CNN article about the ongoing pants suit?

I think everyone should boycott this "Great American Insurance Company." What they did should be known to all of their customers. I can't believe they are able to conjure up this argument that smoke is a pollution. Many victims of fire are killed by smoke inhalation, but by the fire itself. By arguing that smoke from fire is pollution, it only make people think they are looking for excuse not to pay. It won't make them look smarter. Their blatant excuse not to pay the money is deplorable. What they do is going to kill their business with future prospects.

"Great American Insurance Company is arguing in a Houston federal court that the section of the insurance policy that excludes payments for pollution - like discharges or seepage that require cleanup - would also exclude payouts for damages, including deaths, caused by smoke, or pollution, that results from a fire."

I hope there's a special place in hell for the leadership of companies like GAIC.

They must be hoping for a group of morons on the jury.

The article mentioned that there is actually a small chance that the insurance company could WIN if the court rules on the literal language of the policy.

I sure hope that doesn't happen.

I was an an insurance professional for a while, and I can tell you that this has nothing to do with trying to avoid the claim. It is simply a stalling tactic. You want the plaintiffs to negotiate to a reasonable number.

Its a game they play.

@FoxBearDog:

DING DING DING DING DING DING!

Ladies & Gentleman, we have a winner!

Yup, as much as WE the People would like to believe that Courts laws and lawyers are about justice and fairness, The sad truth is that the entire system has been turned into a perverse parody of justice, for sale to the richest plaintiff or defendant.

That's what you get when the lawyers become legislators and start writing the laws.

Now I think about it. I don't think what OPEC is doing will ever work in current economy. The oil price closely depends on the world economy. bad world economy is the source and the low oil price is the result. it is futile to trim the over grown branches when the root is very strong. If they want the price of oil to go up, they should come up with something to help world economy.

The Cincinnati Reds play in Great American Ball Park.

@FoxBearDog: It's, uhh... It's always been that way.

@Mike Latimer: Ah, the same Cincinnati Reds once owned by Marge Schott. Makes sense.

@Parkesborough:

There is no litigation before the suit is filed in court... to say that the issue is with a litigious society (though you disclaim that its not necessarily a bad thing) is to say that the process should have stopped when the company said they wouldn't cover the claim, thus screwing over the families. In this case, the suit seeks to right the wrong, not take advantage of it. Over litigiousness has nothing to do with it.

Two prisoners are talking about their crimes:

George: "I robbed a bank, and they gave me 20 years"

Herman: "Hmm. I killed a man, and I'm here for 3 days"

George: "*WHAT*??? I rob a bank and get 20 years; you kill a man and get 3 days???"

Herman: "Yeah, it was a lawyer."

@Snarkysnake: The whole point of insurance is to charge for a product you have no intent ever to deliver.

Naturally, these are the same assholes we decided to turn our healthcare system over to.

This lawyer is the kind of cretin that would argue that a person murdered by a pistol really died of complications due to lead poisoning.

@BillyShears:

That bus is just pollution.

@crashfrog: The insurance industry is the most evil industry in the world, in my opinion. Though the bankers and hedge fund asshats have been giving them a run for their money lately.

I've come to the conclusion that the only socially ethical and responsible "solution" to the abuses of the insurance industry, in general, is to totally socialize them and run them as government entities (with subsidies from taxes as necessary). Otherwise the profit motive will always fundamentally conflict with the social goals served by insurance. I'd vote for any politician that proposed to completely drop the hammer on the insurers.

Let them claim:

1) Makes them look bad
2) Supreme Court will deny it
3) New by-law will be passed covering smoke from fire in future cases

When your friends mention the McDonald's coffee case - you don't need to cite this case. Remind them of the facts of the McDonald's case. 1. The woman was scalded - THROUGH HER CLOTHING - on her labia. 2. They found an internal Mickey D's memo saying that they knew people would get burnt but that on balance having a reputation for serving the hottest coffee was worth the lawsuits.