• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

There's gotta be another side to this story...right?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ns1

No Lifer
What's a Pre-Existing Condition to Murder?

KNOXVILLE (CN) - After her husband was murdered by being shot in the back, Settlers Life Insurance refused to pay his widow's claim because, the insurer said, he had a "pre-existing medical condition," the widow says in Knox County Court.
Stephanie Ross McCraw, whose husband was killed in April 2008, wants her claim paid and damages for bad faith. She is represented by Bill Hotz.

suit


I hate insurance companies.

(if you're wondering, the preexisting condition is hep c)
 
Originally posted by: zerocool84
Yep crap like this is one of the many resons why I hate our insurance companies.


No one is forcing you to get insurance*.

(*Except MA)
 
Originally posted by: KK
Originally posted by: zerocool84
Yep crap like this is one of the many resons why I hate our insurance companies.


No one is forcing you to get insurance*.

(*Except MA)

But when you pay your premiums to have insurance for such an accident and when it's time for you to actually collect on said policy they try and dig up every type of excuse NOT to pay you. Insurance is just a big scam.
 
I'm guessing the reasoning is that he failed to disclose the condition when he got the policy (or maybe later, if he was required to do so), and he didn't. So they would say the policy was never valid, regardless of how he died.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
I'm guessing the reasoning is that he failed to disclose the condition when he got the policy (or maybe later, if he was required to do so), and he didn't. So they would say the policy was never valid, regardless of how he died.

That's probably the logic behind it. Perhaps they never would have even offered to cover him if the condition was known to them, or his premiums would have been higher at the least.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top