GEICO has you covered -- $5.2MM for getting an STD
-
-
Not really. It seems that the mistake was in Geico’s defense of denying coverage, not of denying the claim on the merits. Huge screwup by their lawyers, but not something that sets a precedent for every teenager at Makeout Point…
The Brad
-
Not really. It seems that the mistake was in Geico’s defense of denying coverage, not of denying the claim on the merits. Huge screwup by their lawyers, but not something that sets a precedent for every teenager at Makeout Point…
@LuFins-Dad said in GEICO has you covered -- $5.2MM for getting an STD:
Not really. It seems that the mistake was in Geico’s defense of denying coverage, not of denying the claim on the merits. Huge screwup by their lawyers, but not something that sets a precedent for every teenager at Makeout Point…
Yes, that's the correct reading... I just think it would be hilarious to sue insurance companies for any damage that occurs in the vehicles they insure, including child support.
-
Not really. It seems that the mistake was in Geico’s defense of denying coverage, not of denying the claim on the merits. Huge screwup by their lawyers, but not something that sets a precedent for every teenager at Makeout Point…
@LuFins-Dad said in GEICO has you covered -- $5.2MM for getting an STD:
Not really. It seems that the mistake was in Geico’s defense of denying coverage, not of denying the claim on the merits.
So many double negations… could somebody translate that into plain English?
-
K Klaus referenced this topic on
-
@LuFins-Dad said in GEICO has you covered -- $5.2MM for getting an STD:
Not really. It seems that the mistake was in Geico’s defense of denying coverage, not of denying the claim on the merits.
So many double negations… could somebody translate that into plain English?
@Klaus said in GEICO has you covered -- $5.2MM for getting an STD:
@LuFins-Dad said in GEICO has you covered -- $5.2MM for getting an STD:
Not really. It seems that the mistake was in Geico’s defense of denying coverage, not of denying the claim on the merits.
So many double negations… could somebody translate that into plain English?
Geico didn't have to pay because the woman got HPV, they had to pay because in their defense they said the guy didn't have Geico coverage when he did. They also made a mistake in going to arbitration, which limits their ability to appeal. The precedent set wasn't "get an STD in a car and the car insurance will have to pay out", the precedent was "Don't hire bad lawyers".
