PADI getting sued over Insurance Program

[PuMpUi]

Your example is poor because the person didn't pay the broker for his house not to burn down, he payed to have insurance during a specified period and the bogus transaction is common theft.

Instead of the government investigating this fraud, submitting the evidence to grand jury, prosecuting, obtaining restitution for the victims and sending some folks to jail, the plaintiffs have to pay their attorney 1/3 of their loss and the bad guys get to go home to cook up their next scheme - which is why the country is in the mess it is.

Hmmm ... who do you think they learned from? (The Federal Reserve / Gubbermint, for those who don't see my sarcasm/humor in this)

Bernie Maddoff (pardon the spelling) may have just been the beginning of all this.

PS. I believe that the Plaintiff(s) pay from their "winnings", while the cause of class action stems from their "losses". And sometimes the bad guys get to go to a new home, just ask Bernie. IMHO.

 

[theduckguru]

Hmmm ... who do you think they learned from? (The Federal Reserve / Gubbermint, for those who don't see my sarcasm/humor in this)

Bernie Maddoff (pardon the spelling) may have just been the beginning of all this.

PS. I believe that the Plaintiff(s) pay from their "winnings", while the cause of class action stems from their "losses". And sometimes the bad guys get to go to a new home, just ask Bernie. IMHO.

Yes, if you make national TV and piss enough people off you might go to jail.

After being conviced in the Enron fraud, Ken Lay died while on vacation never serving a single day in jail.

 

[PuMpUi]

(Deleted by User)

 

[cerich]

well seems the plot thickens, however the headline is misleading it should be "Temporarily Revokes"

PADI Revokes Teaching Status of Store Owner In Insurance Suit

Divenewswire

 

[ScubaSteve]

well seems the plot thickens, however the headline is misleading it should be "Temporarily Revokes"

PADI Revokes Teaching Status of Store Owner In Insurance Suit

Divenewswire

Both are technically correct but their version "sells" better . One has to wonder how such a "coincidence" could occur. Perhaps decisions are being made based on emotion and without legal advice . One way or another, it looks very bad on PADI IMO (not that that amounts to much).

 

[Thalassamania]

It appears to me that PADI is exhibiting a level of institutional hubris that borders on the suicidal.

One would think that in a situation like this an organization would be especially careful about what it did rather than appearing to stagger about like a pissed-off drunk bent on revenge.

 

[Walter]

That doesn't look (to this layman) like the wisest thing PADI could have done in this situation.

 

[ItsBruce]

Having litigated both for and against insurance carriers when they are the named party, I hope to be able to clarify a few points:

1. Without talking to an involved attorney, I have no clue how PADI could get sucked into the DSD case referenced above just by being the one to pay the lawyers or judgment. I'm guessing that someone may have misunderstood something on this point.

2. My best, educated guess is that the money PADI collects on the premiums comes pretty close to paying the claims costs, whether they be the fees for the attorney who is defending the insured or the settlement or judgment. I seriously doubt PADI is making any real money off the insurance.

 

[Wookie]

Having litigated both for and against insurance carriers when they are the named party, I hope to be able to clarify a few points:

1. Without talking to an involved attorney, I have no clue how PADI could get sucked into the DSD case referenced above just by being the one to pay the lawyers or judgment. I'm guessing that someone may have misunderstood something on this point.

2. My best, educated guess is that the money PADI collects on the premiums comes pretty close to paying the claims costs, whether they be the fees for the attorney who is defending the insured or the settlement or judgment. I seriously doubt PADI is making any real money off the insurance.

The figures I hear being bandied about is 2.5 million dollars per year. Of course, out of that comes the $300,000 deductible. Maybe many times. That's the problem. As a Risk Retention Group, PADI would have the backing of an underwriter. My question is, a hurricane like Andrew hits the Florida Keys. 20 dive shops are completely wiped out, along with a number of boats. Most dive shops aren't worth $300,000, so PADI is going to carry the nut for lost business (which they cap at a ridiculously small amount), and say a hundred to a hundred and fifty grand for each shop for contents, building, inventory, etc. If PADI isn't a Risk Retention Group licensed in Florida, they don't have to send an adjuster to look at the place, they can send the area rep. The area rep can decide that the damage was caused by flood, which PADI doesn't insure for, or maybe windstorm, which PADI doesn't insure for, or maybe all claims are accepted, but PADI can't afford to pay out all claims. There's just too many scenario's to consider. That's why I have a agent that will gladly give me a copy of the master policy, and my insurance bill each year lists where my premiums go, as in, how much to Lloyds, how much to Willis, how much to whoever gets a cut.

 

[mselenaous]

Just got this:
Divenewswire