Walmart IS of the debil!

[Vonne]

Okay, perhaps... not, but this is still pretty darn startling! :panic

A collision with a tractor-trailer seven years ago left 52-year-old Deborah Shank permanently brain-damaged and in a wheelchair. Her husband, Jim, and three sons found a small source of solace: a $700,000 accident settlement from the trucking company involved.

After legal fees and other expenses, the remaining $417,000 was put in a special trust. It was to be used for Deborah Shank's care.

Instead, all of it is now slated to go to Deborah's former employer, Wal-Mart Stores.

By The Wall Street Journal, Via MSN

Linky (http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/KnowYourRights/EmployersGrabAccidentVictimsCash.aspx)

[MrMannn]

Wal-Mart's health plan sued an ex-worker, brain-damaged in a crash, to collect money from a settlement she'd received. It's part of a trend in which companies aggressively try to recoup insurance costs.
Hmmm. Why sue the worker when they could sue the truck company?
This just spells bad mana to me.

[KarenB]

Quote: In insurance circles, the recovery practice is called "subrogation." Employers and insurers say it's necessary to ensure that medical expenses aren't paid twice. By recovering those costs from someone who's been compensated elsewhere, they argue, they're saving money for everyone on the plan.

But what about compensation for the future costs? She lost a job, income, abilities and has gotten struggles and (emotional/spiritual) suffering. She has lost and keeps losing in every area of life there is. And they want to take this money away from her?! Saving money for everyone :tsk

[Bernardd]

But what about compensation for the future costs? She lost a job, income, abilities and has gotten struggles and (emotional/spiritual) suffering. She has lost and keeps losing in every area of life there is. And they want to take this money away from her?! Saving money for everyone

Isn't there insurance to cover those future costs? (disability insurance)
Emotional damage? How much is that?

She's lost everything? I disagree with that.

[Cognac]

Read the entire article, all 3 pages of it.
I just gets worse and worse.

Dehumanised, is the word for it.

[Bernardd]

I read it. Not sure what the problem is.

[Arcas]

I read it. Not sure what the problem is.

Hmm...i can see why the employer should not be forced to pay for the treatment of injuries caused by someone else; the one who caused the accident should be held responsible for that.

I guess the source of the problem is that coverage of the medical costs and the compensation for the loss of quality of life are grouped together as a single payment, so that an increase of the cost of the medical care automatically reduces the compensation.

These should be separate, so that the victim can hand over the medical care check to the employer or whoever actually pays the bills of the hospital and be done with that. The actual compensation remains untouched this way.

[Bernardd]

The party at fault (the trucking company) paid the damages. Why should Wal Mart get stuck holding the bill? Thus, Wal Mart was reimbused!

If Wal Mart hadn't paid the initial medical costs, what would have been the difference? Again, Wal MArt didn't injure this person, the trucking company did. Yet Wal MArt initally paid the medical bills allowing this woman to get her medical needs addressed.

Perhaps in the future Wal Mart should simply say "NO! We won't pay a dime if someone else (or some other party) is at fault."

Wal Mart paid...and was then reimbursed...as it should have been.

Why there should be added insurance for pain and suffering, work time lost etc. is unclear. Perhaps the victim should have gotten a better attorney or simply NOT have accepted the initial $700,000 offer the trucking company ended up paying. Perhaps the victim should have held out and sued that trucking company for $100 million!

[redeemed]

This is very sad, but I am not sure why the trucking company wasn't the one footing the bill in the first place! My husband was in an accident and we could either pay the bills out of pocket and then be reimbursed from the "party at faults insurance" or our insurance company could pay and then be remimbursed by the party at fault. Thankfully the bills weren't too terrible, so we paid out of pocket. The insurance company of the man who caused the accident then reimbursed us for every penny, reimbursed us for my husband's car and then paid pain and suffering on top of it all! Something doesn't add up in this story....sounds like this whole situation was handled inappropriately right from the beginning and the poor family that went through the tragedy possibly weren't informed as to how this all works. If they were pushed into settling with the insurance company too quickly, I can see how this could have happened. Very sad.:tsk

I agree that $700,000 doesn't sound like a fair amount for this particular accident. Someone wasn't doing thier job in helping this family make a wise decision when they decided to settle.