25 Cal Republican Lawmakers Urge Supreme Court to Help Safeco Insurance

In a stunning show of fealty to insurance giant Safeco, 14 Republican state Senators and 11 Assemblymembers have asked the California Supreme Court to overturn an appellate ruling that Safeco Insurance has to disclose the names of policyholders it may have cheated. 

SafeCo-Reps.jpgConsidering that state lawmakers are supposed to be spending their time grappling with the disastrous state budget, it must be very important to these lawmakers to protect Safeco from accountability for overcharging Californians, including, no doubt, folks in their district.  Who do they think are their constituents?... O' Safeco, how can we serve you?

The Senators who signed the letter are, pictured from left to right, Sen. Cogdil, Sen. Aanasted, Sen. Benoit, Sen. Ashburn, Sen. Cox and Sen. Hollingsworth, as well as Senators Denham, Dutton, Harman, Huff, Runner, Strickland, Walters and Wyland (Maldonado is the only Republican Senator not to sign). Also signing were Assemblymembers Smyth, Tran, Strickland, Silva, Fletcher, Berryhill, Garrick, Gilmore, Fuller, Anderson and Logue.

Here's the backstory:

Last month a California Court of Appeals ruled that Safeco had to give our lawyers access to their files to identify Safeco customers who were surcharged in violation of California law.  As the Los Angeles DailyJournal reported:

In a published opinion that loosens limits on consumer class actions, an appellate court said Safeco Insurance Co. must disclose which customers it allegedly surcharged illegally several years ago.

The rub is that the customer list, if produced, could identify hundreds - even thousands - of new plaintiffs in an on-going complaint against the Seattle-based auto insurer.

In 2002, after investigating Safeco’s auto insurance application process, Consumer Watchdog sued the company for violating California law, which forbids insurers from surcharging or refusing to insure motorists just because they previously did not have insurance. The suit also charges that Safeco failed to disclose its practices to the Insurance Commissioner – a separate violation of the law.

In 2004 insurers and other big businesses won passage of Prop 64 -- claiming to stop "shakedown lawsuits" but actually attacking the rights of consumer and environmental groups to hold corporate cheats accountable.  Later, Safeco cited that initiative to say that Consumer Watchdog could not bring this lawsuit on behalf of the public. A volunteer stepped forward to continue the suit, but the trial court determined that she was not a proper plaintiff. 

Based on the fact that it was quite evident that Safeco engaged in the improper practice, the Court ordered Safeco to provide a list of the people who were surcharged, so they could have an opportunity to participate in the litigation. The Court of Appeal agreed so Safeco has gone to the Supreme Court hoping to block accountability.

A decision by the Cal Supreme Court whether or not to review the case is expected soon.

Rate This Article:

Comments:

Post A Comment

You are not logged in, please do so at the top of the page.

Recent Posts in Going to Court:

Thanks Blue Cross, you gave the public its reason to reform

The President called for an up or down vote on health care reform, but I can say from my own experience this week working with Blue Cross patients, who are part of Consumer Watchdog’s lawsuit against he company, that the public has already cast its vote. 

Read More »

President Obama's best ally--Anthem Blue Cross

President Obama's "get it done" speech on health reform Wednesday may have been a day late, but I hope it's not a dollar short, as the old saying goes. At least he has one tremendous ally in his call for action by Congress: Anthem Blue Cross, and the continuing outrage at its huge rate increases.

 

Read More »

Can't pay for your health insurance?

Veteran political cartoonist Clay Bennett of Chattanooga has the solution...

 

Read More »

Why shouldn't Obama throw innocent patients under the bus? Ask Steven Olsen

As pressure builds toward Thursday's "bipartisan" presidential summit on health care reform, some Capitol Hill staffers have reported receiving calls from the White House claiming the President is ready to give up the legal rights of medical malpractice victims for GOP support.

What's wrong with the trade-off? LA's local NPR talk radio host, Larry Mantle of KPCC's Air Talk, asked me yesterday in a midst of a debate about Obama's new health care reform proposal, which appropriately did not mention any changes to medical malpractice accountability. So I told Steven Olsen's story.

Yesterday happened to be the 20th birthday for Steven Olsen, whose tragic story at the age of two year deeply touched me and every one who ever heard it. Steven and his terrific parents, Kathy and Scott, will be at the White House next Monday to stop the President from using the remedies of innocent patients as a bargaining chip to get Republican votes. If President Obama personally spends a few minutes with Steven, it's hard to imagine how his conscience will let him sell out the rights of injured patients for Republican votes.

Read More »

Oh, the irony

You may remember the Civil Justice Association of California from decades of attacks on consumer rights such as Proposition 64, the ballot initiative that let companies off the hook under California's unfair competition law for any harm that is not measured in dollars, like loss of health, environmental damage or consumer deception ...

Read More »

View All Next »

Forward This Page To A Friend

Credit Card Surcharges Being Passed On To Consumers

Consumer Watchdog In Action

Recent Legal Actions