Are You Really in Good Hands with Allstate?

David Rosenthal
Attorney
(866) 735-1102 Ext 576
Posted by David RosenthalSeptember 30, 2008 3:35 PM

Allstate Insurance is easily the most prolific advertiser of auto and casualty insurance lines. It runs a series of television commercials starring Dennis Haysbert (of Major League fame) that cleverly portray real life situations, such as rear end auto collisions, and some not so real life situations, like wayward college football fans running their car into a statue of renowned coach Bobby Bowden, to illustrate the need for insurance. The pithy theme of each ad is driven home with the statement "that's Allstate's stand", and with the suggestion that you are not in good hands unless your insurance is through Allstate.

However, experienced consumer attorneys know that Allstate's advertising claims are in stark contrast to its every day claims handling practices. Trial lawyers are in a unique position to judge the overall approach of insurance companies because they deal with a broad cross-section of insurance companies in a wide variety of factual scenarios. During the handling of thousands of claims, the true corporate color of an insurance company shines through. And after reviewing a high volume of claims documents recently, the American Association for Justice unequivocally rated Allstate as the worst insurance company for consumers.

Allstate policy holders might feel that the wrap on Allstate is the result of sour grapes on the part of attorneys who are resentful that their outrageous claims were not paid by the company. However, Allstate's rating was not solely the result of a "boxing glove" corporate policy of lowballing legitimate claims made against its policy holders, although that was certainly part of it. Allstate has also made clear it was willing to get into the ring and duke it out with its own policy holders in the name of increasing profits. In addition, its low rating was based on paying high executive salaries as a reward for successful lowball tactics and charging higher premiums, in part to pay for its expensive advertising.

One recent Allstate commercial illustrates another goal of the Allstate advertising campaign. The ad shows a court room scene where the judge imposes a judgment on a young man (the defendant) in the amount of $100,000 after an auto collision. The defendant's attorney turns to the injured person's (plaintiff) attorney to explain that the defendant has only $50,000 in insurance. The plaintiff's attorney replies that the defendant has a college fund that can be used to pay the balance of the judgment, and concerned parents ask their attorney - "can they do that?" The defendants attorney replies that they can.

The ad is designed to mislead the viewer into believing that the defendant is an innocent victim (it was just an "accident"), and that both the court system and a greedy plaintiff's attorney are the victimizers. This promotes the belief that trial lawyers and frivolous lawsuits are the cause of high insurance premiums.

In real life, such a scenario would likely be the result of an auto collision caused by a speeding driver who was distracted by his cell phone and ran a red light, sending the other driver to the hospital with serious, possibly permanent injuries. The other driver incurs medical expenses of $25,000, loses income from work of $10,000, and has ongoing pain and limitations. Although the value of the pain, suffering and inconvenience is well in excess of $15,000, the other driver is willing to settle out of court for the responsible driver's $50,000 policy limit to avoid going to trial, and probably out of a moral feeling that he does not want to collect against the responsible driver's personal assets.

Even though the other driver is without fault, the insurance company for the responsible driver puts on its boxing gloves and offers only $40,000, which is less than the policy limit of $50,000. The attorney for the injured person has no choice but to spend thousands of dollars to take the case to trial to seek the full value of the injured person's damages. A jury of reasonable people taken from the general population (rather than a judge as portrayed in the ad) determines that the total value of the injured person's loss is $100,000. Now, because of the insurance company's lowball at all cost mentality, there is a judgment against the responsible party for more than his insurance coverage.

Allstate Insurance has engaged in a successful marketing campaign. But this expensive advertising comes at a cost. The consumer warning caveat emptor is especially appropriate when you consider purchasing insurance from Allstate. Purchasers of insurance from Allstate may find that the "good hands" have boxing gloves on, and making a claim is like ringing the fight bell.

16 Comments

Have an opinion about this post? Please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Mark
Posted by Mark
September 30, 2008 4:44 PM

On Aug. 16 of this year my son had the misfortune of getting run off the road by a Ms. Bonnie Mayer who was driving a friends full size Ford Excursion insured by Northwest Phychiatric through ALLSTATE. As I expected Ms.Bonnie Mayer changed her story and said she was on her side of the road while she told us that she was looking for a parking spot and wandered across the road into the oncoming lane and then after said the truck wasen't hers and it was to big for her. Go figure. Therefor our claim was denied. Thank-you ALLSTATE

Fair is Fair
Posted by Fair is Fair
September 30, 2008 8:58 PM

Geico advertises that a 15 minute phone call will save you up to 40% on your insurance. Not so. Progressive says they will quote your insurance plus three other companies. They quoted me Progressive and three other companies. I called State Farm was quoted $100 less than Progressive quoted me (the State Farm rate)by $100 and the Allstate quote was $200 cheaper than they quoted me. Which one of these is true? None of them.
Lawyers state they will do the work for free without a fee unless they win. Caveat Emptor Lawyers should always tell their clients the truth too! They dont give away the expenses for free. Lawyers can mislead the same way they think the insurance companies advertise. If you really want to cut back on lawsuits do away with attorney advertising because it is right up their with tobacco and alchohol.

pvogel
Posted by pvogel
October 01, 2008 1:51 AM

I am an Allstate agent and I see claims paid every day and am proud of our claims department.

I'm sorry that David Rosenthal feels the way he does, I think understand where his motivation lies.

Maybe he has an underlying hate for Allstate for a reason, only he knows.

The people that I know that represent the Allstate family are ethical, understanding and caring and are polar opposites of what this author portrays.

I trust Allstate enough to insure my family with the Good Hands Company. I have many customers that have seen the Good Hands Promise in action.

I do not have a 30% motivational interest in separating people from their money and bad mouthing a particular company.

Maybe David Rosenthal doesn't either.

Steve Lombardi
Posted by Steve Lombardi
October 01, 2008 8:52 AM

David, Nice post and I agree about lawyers being in a unique position to know about being in good hands. The agents won't tell the insureds the entire truth because agents get paid more when the company does well, meaning when the bottom line increases. The bottom line increases when claims aren't paid. (I'd be curious about bonuses paid to agents based on company performance.)Agents aren't adjusters. Agents are cheerleaders for the company. They purposefully stay ignorant of any one claim so they are never placed in the position of having to criticize the claim handling. As the front-man, claim adjusters are claim destroyers. The adjuster has only two goals when they talk to a claimant. 1. Find a way to deny the claim. 2. If you can't deny find a way to pay less than the fair value of the claim.
Interesting that none of the pro-commenters used their full name. As you can see because I'm proud of what I do, my full name appears along with my comment. That's the thing about speaking the truth, you never have to hide your identity. Again, well written.

tost
Posted by tost
October 01, 2008 9:56 AM

It always amuses me about the ignorance of lawyers when it comes to the business that they attempt to profit from. Would the author like to take a stab at how often an insurance company makes money on Underwriting? Not just Allstate but any insurance company. It almost never happens, companies try to keep the combined ratio as close to 1 as possible but this is looked at as an expense more often that not. Insurance companies would never make enough money on a yearly basis to account for costs if they relied on not paying out claims. Truly the reason they attempt to play hard-ball in certain situations is to keep their rates down and attractive to the general public. Because they make money on the investments of the premiums so the larger the volume of premium dollars the more profitable the company. Get a clue.

Ray
Posted by Ray
October 01, 2008 1:00 PM

I'm not a fan of either side in conditions like this, but I think it's hokey to see a lawyer trying to be serious when he’s, in fact, simply making his biggest source of money look even worse.

The only real reference this article has to offer is a broken link to consumer affairs (note: at the time of reading this the link location pointed to: More ... ).

Also, circumstantial points such as, “such a scenario would likely be,” are ignorant. This is pure opinion and is no more or less valid then the commercial that was insulted.

It all seems to boil down to the fact that the Allstate commercial is marketing to get your business, and this article is marketing to get your business.

And now that I have put down simple opinion, I shall post mine :)

Steve Lombardi
Posted by Steve Lombardi
October 01, 2008 2:53 PM

Dear "Tost": Thank you for the comment. What business are you in? Is "Tost" your legal name?

Dear Ray: In what business do you earn a living? Do you have a last name? The InjuryBoard isn't about marketing. It's not about generating "leads". It's about our client's side of the story and educating people about the system of civil justice. While I can't speak for all the IB lawyers, I can say that for many it's about talking to people who have been influenced by various paid lobbying campaigns geared towards prejudicing jurors thinking about our system of civil justice. I talk, for free, with many people who read my blog and want to discuss something. I answer emails in the same way; and without compensation. For me it's about the conversation I have with those people. Many have no claim, but like the IB, are interested in some point of law or risk where regulations are lax and need to be worked to protect people from injury. And that leads me to the reason for the IB. It's about injury protection, education and stopping people from being injured; not as you assumed about case leads. So you're incorrect in your main assumption; after all, if you were right why would I be taking the time to talk to you?

I rest my case.

Steve Lombardi
Posted by Steve Lombardi
October 01, 2008 3:05 PM

One more thing; read this post by Brooks Schuelke about your altruistic and compassionate insurance industry and how in three instances they dealt with paying. Perhaps you will be able to enlighten us lawyers with the legitimate reasons for these claim practices by them. Three claims with well known people and all treated the same; with frivolous delay tactics.

Even Celebrities Aren't Immune To Insurance Company Shenanigans

(More ... )

In my opinion, not every insurance company is bad. Not every insurance adjuster is either. But let’s face it if in fact injured people were in “good hands” I’d be out of business.

tost
Posted by tost
October 01, 2008 5:09 PM

I am a computer programmer and tost is my screen name but I was an econ major in college.

Ray
Posted by Ray
October 01, 2008 5:46 PM

Steve,

Thanks for the thought. I did start my post off with: "I'm not a fan of either side," so I'm not calling anyone "altruistic" here.

I think this board is a great idea, and I appreciate the help (often free, as you mentioned) that is offered; however, this in no way was the point of my post; my intention was to point out a weakness in the argument, one that would hopefully help strengthen future ones.

For example, I do believe the comment regarding the quote "such a scenario would likely be" truly is circumstantial, and doesn't hold much weight as an argument countering the mentioned commercial.

I am curious about the statement "after all, if you were right why would I be taking the time to talk to you?" While I do quite enjoy discussions involving a difference of opinion, I do also enjoy conversations with those of the same mind; this allows me to further my knowledge on a topic or subject.

I'm glad to see a devils advocate approach has stirred up some good points; although, I was hoping for better conversation and less emotion.

David Rosenthal
Posted by David Rosenthal
October 01, 2008 5:58 PM

Thanks for all of the responses. My comments are as follows:

1. Mark, I'm sorry to hear about your son's incident and your experience with Allstate.

2. PVogel, please do not take my comments personally, my purpose was not to criticize every Allstate employee. You can disregard the blog as personal vendetta if you like, but the hardball corporate tactics have been well documented. You might ask why, out of all insurance companies, Allstate would receive this kind of negative feed back. More ...

3. Tost, I was not an econ major and can't comment on combined ratios when it comes to underwriting. I'm also not sure how you have demonstrated I'm clueless with regard to claims handling.

4. Ray, sorry about the bad link, hopefully this one works:
More ...
That scenario was actually taken from many real life experiences, and in my opinion was more reflective of reality than the Allstate ad.

5. Steve, you are someone who would know about this topic, thanks for your comments.

Steve Lombardi
Posted by Steve Lombardi
October 01, 2008 7:38 PM

Tost and Ray: Thanks for the info. The IB is about talking with people just like yourselves and having an exchange of ideas. So if I offended or sounded like I was taking it personal, don't be offended. Some days I'm just testy or a grouch which is probably due to having too many people asking for help with problems and not having enough time in the work day to answer all the questions and put out all of the fires. As for my statement about talking with Ray, it can't be all about money and clients with me, because I'm not getting paid to talk with either of you and yet I'm still here talking to you about these issues and it's 6:34 PM. I think it's time for me to go home. Hopefully more later. Your comments about Allstate did give me an idea for a post for later this month. And like a good neighbor State Farm is there....

Rebecca
Posted by Rebecca
October 03, 2008 10:29 PM

I work for one of the big 4. I work in the Subro department in the litigation division. This post is in reaction to the comments from people who have no idea what the commercial was really about. I have gone after assets of people who have damaged our insured because they are too cheap to have adequate coverage on their policies. When I have an insured that has sustained substantial damage, say a totaled out veh for say 10k (this is a really low $) and the claimant only has limits of 5k. Yes his ins co will offer me their limits. I then search for any assets the clmt may have and if collectible sue them directly. I OWE IT TO MY INSURED TO MAKE THEM WHOLE. I have taken houses, and likely ruined lives. But I then think to myself what if it was me, what would I want my insurance to do. Think about it. And make sure you have as much coverage as possible or I may be coming after you.

Sam
Posted by Sam
October 06, 2008 3:21 PM

I believe commercials like the one described in the article taint future jury pools. You can claim this ad has a simple message and the rest of us are taking it out of context, but Allsnake is well-known for their dirty tactics. They have been held in contempt of court in several states for their civil procedure delay tactics. I am sure it crossed some Allstate marketing employee’s mind that their commercial would paint victims of bad drivers to be money-grubbing, lawsuit happy opportunists.

Tort Reformer
Posted by Tort Reformer
October 08, 2008 6:20 PM

I work in the Bodily Injury / Litigation Department for an insurance company you've probably never heard of.

If an insurer is truly "lowballing" claimants in an effort to save a buck, and failing to tender their insured's policy limits when it's reasonably clear that a jury would award that much or higher, they're flirting with disaster when the insured comes back with a bad faith action against the insurer with their rights assigned to the Plaintiff's attorney. They may face double or even triple damages in excess of the policy limits if it can be proven that their rascality exposed their insureds personally. Topped off by interest and attorney's fees in some states, the company should pay dearly for failing to settle just to help their bottom line.

That being said, determining what is "reasonably clear" has been made tough by the countless medical providers, attorneys, and claimants who, also in an effort to make a quick buck, churn out thousands of overstated, over-reaching, and possibly even fraudulent claims:

More ...

More ...

As an adjuster, there is nothing more satisfying to me than dealing with a claimant who is truly injured, assessing damages fairly, and bringing their claim to an amicable resolution. However, I believe the Plaintiff's bar should accept some of the responsibility for having made that job a tough one.

Then again, it keeps me in business...

chris kreeger
Posted by chris kreeger
October 29, 2008 5:03 PM

dave: well said, the good hands people only have their best interests at heart. it amazes me that people are stupid enough to buy into their whole mantra, are you in good hands. of course, when they find out the truth, that is when they make a claim, and then realize they were not in good hands after all, by then, it is too late, and they realize they have been taken advantage of. allstate has repeatedly been sanctioned by the state insurance commissioners throughout this country for unfair claims handling. they have repeatedly been hit with large bad faith verdicts and settlements. they have repeatedly been ordered to change their claims handling tactics by numerous government agencies, and none of this appears on any of their ads. it is a complete and total fraud upon the consumers of insurance services to say if you buy allstate insurance, you are in good hands, in my opinion. if anything, their hands are unclean, and the worst part is they know it, but the average consumer does not. for anyone who works there to say they are an honorable company with their insured's best interests at heart is to ignore the obvious. finally, and most importantly, their tv ad campaigns, i.e. the son gets hit with a verdict and the greedy lawyer plans to take mom and dad's house away because of son's negligence is nothing but trial lawyer bashing designed to anger people towards lawyers and people who make claims, and play upon consumers worst fears. shameful is too light to characterize their behavior and scheme in my opinion. keep up the good work.

Comments for this article are closed.

Subscribe to InjuryBoard Sacramento

InjuryBoard Sacramento RSS Feeds

Keep up with the latest updates using your favorite RSS reader

Injury Board Sacramento is brought to you by Demas & Rosenthal, LLP

Legal Assistance Center

More Info
Demas & Rosenthal, LLP (866) 735-1102 Ext 575 www.injury-attorneys.com/
google
Personal Injury Lawyers Serving: Sacramento, West Sacramento, Chico, Folsom, Rocklin, Roseville, Woodland, South Lake Tahoe, Paradise, Yuba City, Collusa, Corning, Grass Valley, Linda, Live Oak, Magalia, Marysville, Nevada City, Oroville, Red Bluff, Ukiah, Willows, Amador County, Auburn, Citrus Heights, Davis, Elk Grove, Galt, Lodi, Stockton, Jackson, Ione, Lincoln, Placerville, Truckee, Vacaville, Fairfield, all surrounding areas
701 Howe AveSuite A-1, Sacramento , California 95825 [ Show Map ]
Better Business Bureau Accredited Business Confidential

Your question will be referred to an attorney near you. If your question is of a legal nature, then by submitting this form you agree you are not forming a formal attorney / client relationship. Read our full privacy policy.

Looking for an InjuryBoard attorney closer to home? Click here.

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Enter your email address if you would like to receive email notifications when comments are made on this post.

Email address