Hey, here’s a story for all you guys who argue that kids who sit out bowl games to protect their professional futures should buy an insurance policy, suck it up and play.
Attorneys representing former University of Arkansas, Fayetteville football standout Rawleigh Williams have filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit alleging breach of contract and other complaints against insurance giant Lloyd’s of London.
The lawsuit was filed Monday in Washington County Circuit Court, naming underwriters at Lloyd’s, International Specialty Insurance and agent Justin B. Boeving of Prairie Grove as defendants.
Williams, 21, is suing the parties for breach of contract, claiming they have not paid on a $1 million disability insurance policy taken out in March 2017. The lawsuit, a copy of which was obtained by the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, also claims bad faith, deceit and civil conspiracy on the defendants’ part.
An insurance company avoiding payment? Mah stahs, Miz Scarlett!
“The reason you file these lawsuits is, for one, you paid for a product that was not given to you, which is simply unfair,” Horton said.
The lawsuit claims Williams entered into the policy on March 10, 2017, and that Lloyd’s amended the policy last May — after Williams suffered the injury that led to his retirement — to include an endorsement that would exclude coverage of any injury that arose out of Williams’ “spinal column and adjacent and related structures.”
The lawsuit alleges Williams was made aware of this “endorsement 3” for the first time on May 9, 2017, by Boeving and was told he could decline the policy within 10 days and have his premiums returned.
Yeah, that seems entirely fair.
I guess it’s time for some folks to regroup behind some sort of love of the game argument. That works for coaches, right?
Get The Picture 
Insurance companies. Add up all of the premiums you will pay over your life in auto and home insurance. Shit. Now multiply that times a few million houses and cars in this State. Somebody’s cleaning up Especailly in GA.
But not to worry…with the new law banning hand held device use while driving, accidents, injuries and deaths will decrease sharply. This is based on proven data.
So,, rates will go down!
Right?
Wrong. Insurance companies will have less claims to honor, less expenses and your rates will still go up every single f’ing year. Add it to death and taxes as a sure thing.
And Loyd’s needs to pay up.
Insurance is a gamble..you’re gambling you will need it and you put your money on the table. The insurance company gambles you won’t as they pocket your money. If you don’t need it, you lose. And guess what. If you do need it you still lose. They will nickle and dime you and then raise your rates to regain their payout. Bottom line is auto and home insurance should only be used for really big claims. Get a high deductible and when you have to pay it, consider it money well spent.
LikeLike
Don’t worry. The laws of economics even apply to insurance. Right now, profits for homeowners and auto insurers average around a whopping 5%. And if that number gets really high, it creates a great incentive for new companies to enter the market and undercut the existing insurers.
Also, courts are very good at creating incentives against bad faith actions from insurers. If the court finds that Lloyds acted in bad faith, then instead of paying the $1 million benefit, they will pay several times that amount as punitive damages.
LikeLike
As a veteran of insurance litigation having represented both sides in these kinds of cases I can personally tell you that this kind of behavior is commonplace. If the American public knew what insurers really did………
LikeLike
No doubt, I have worked for a big insurance company and fortunately I am out of that industry. I would be interested in your perspective on this case. I assume its perfectly legal and binding for the insurance company to change the policy with proper notification. As soon as the client paid the premium for this contract then it is a legal contract. It seems like the only thing Williams has going for him is he is suing in the state of Arkansas against a large insurance org. He is likely to get some money. Is that a fair assessment?
LikeLike
As someone opposed to schools paying players, I have no problem with them sitting out meaningless games to protect draft stock. You’re talking about altering a family’s financial future vs. a bowl in Shreveport
LikeLike
I love the “we made a change to our agreement and you have X number of days to decline.” I wonder if they even bothered to call him or just sent an email. Oh well, insurance companies have lawyers, and now he does too. Win-Win for the guys with the briefcases. Golf anyone?
LikeLike
An email? Dude, they probably sent a notice through snail mail that looks like all the other “VERY IMPORTANT DOCUMENT” but no really it’s a credit card application everyone gets every damn day. And our insured probably got it on the 10th day of the 10 day decline period.
LikeLike
It’s often cheaper to litigate and settle than just pay the contract. The biggest leverage, obviously, is the difference in stakes for the two parties. The customer is already dealing with life-changing events and being denied crucial financial resources. The insurance company is just looking at the delta between full payment and partial settlement. It’s basically psychological battery. And it’s perfectly legal. Thanks, State Legislators.
LikeLike
One wishes insurance companies would just do their jobs.
LikeLike
FWIW, I used to work for an ambulance chaser and he only filed suit if the case was a real loser. The threats and posturing was where you made your money.
LikeLike
So if they RETROACTIVELY amended the coverage, can it be the insurance company is trying to cut its losses by jerking the guy around and hoping he will accept less than the full amount?
LikeLike