Brett Cairns - Elmendorf AFB, AK

MY ALLSTATE HORROR STORY

I used to have faith in insurance companies and Canada's civil legal system. After first hand experience with both, I no longer have any faith in either. Moreover, I am totally through with Allstate, the company that stonewalled us for over 10 years and then screwed us in court.

My wife was the innocent victim of a car accident nearly 11 years ago. She was stopped on a highway in Ontario, Canada waiting for traffic to pass so she could make a left turn. She was struck from behind by an inattentive driver and was diagnosed with whiplash shortly after the accident. She developed permanent disabilities from the accident that forced her to quit her trained profession.

These disabilities have caused her pain, discomfort and suffering every day since. Her doctors called them chronic pain, chronic pain syndrome, and fibromyalgia.

Check out the Internet at: http://www.sover.net/~devstar/ or http://www.msnbc.com/news/347373.asp

Allstate stonewalled us, lowballed us and basically ignored us for over 9 years. When it was clear that our case was destined for the courtroom, they replaced the lawyer that they had on the case with one of their best trial lawyers just before the case went to trial in Ontario, Canada. After the random jury selection, the Allstate lawyer was allowed to eliminate all but one of the women on the jury by simply objecting to them without reason (we were told that up to 4 objections could be used - some much for random jury selection). The result was a jury that went from three men and three women to one with five men and one woman. Funny how the Allstate lawyer then proceeded to make a big deal of a common female condition known as stress incontinence that had nothing to do with the accident by inferring that it was the cause of her disabilities and not the accident.

We also found out that the vote of only five of six jury members counted. Was his jury shaping deliberate? You bet! As the court process progressed we were disgusted with it and the tactics of Allstate's "truth be damned" lawyer. The court did not allow the jury to hear that we were battling Allstate or it would have been a mistrial - so much for the truth. Instead they were led to believe that we were battling an old retired pensioner. Neither were they allowed to hear of the lowball offers or stonewalling by Allstate, the tactic of the lawyer replacement, nor were they allowed to hear of the truth contained in the engagement letter of Allstate's "hired gun" medical expert. The Allstate lawyer successfully argued lawyer-client privilege. So much for the truth once again.

We were equally disgusted by the blatant lies of their so called medical expert. He said that their was no definition for my wife's condition on the Internet - there is. He gave a definition of chronic pain that did not even resemble the one he wrote in a book years earlier, and then claimed my wife did not have the disability based on his newly created definition, etc. etc. He was allowed to lie in court under the guise that he was simply expressing his expert medical "opinion". I could go on about the slimeball tactics of the Allstate lawyer and doctor but I think that you get the idea. Neither one gave a damn about the truth or integrity. In the end Allstate won because the jury awarded my wife a settlement that was so small it did not even cover the legal bills let alone our expenses, losses or my wife's pain, suffering, and lost profession as a result of the injuries she sustained in the accident.

After the trial my wife was placed on anti-depressants and attended a six week long chronic pain clinic. We were going to appeal the verdict but could not afford to risk the $75,000.00 in legal fees if the appeal was not successful. Had we been rich, we certainly would have appealed. I guess that justice is only available to those who can afford it. I was once told that most lawyers are concerned with winning at all costs, that judges are concerned with applying the law, and that nobody is concerned with the truth, justice or fairness except the innocent victim. I now firmly believe that statement particularly as it applies to Allstate, its lawyer and doctor. After the trial, I wrote a letter to ask the President of Allstate Canada to ask if his company cared about fairness, integrity or justice. He totally ignore my question and simply replied by saying "I can appreciate that this accident has had a significant impact on you and your family (funny how his lawyer did not acknowledge that in court) and I regret that this has occurred. However, as you know, a jury made a decision with respect to the value of your wife's claim. The verdict was based on evidence presented both by our and yours." I guess his notion of evidence is the rubbish, lies and innuendo put forward by his companies lawyer and doctor. It also amazes me how he ignored the question. By ignoring my question, he certainly confirmed for me what Allstate actually thinks about the truth, fairness and justice (something I came to conclude after the trial anyway).

For those of you who become involved in a car accident involving Allstate as an insurer - good luck. Forget the "you are in good hands" and "famous for fast fair settlements" public relation crap. Allstate cares about its financial bottom line (look at the salaries of its CEO and its huge profits), but does not give a damn about you. Get the best lawyer you can find who has had success against this company if you expect any kind of settlement. The truth alone will not win in court because much of it is prevented from being entered into evidence by tort reform that benefits this type of company. So my wife gets hurt twice - once by the accident as its innocent victim and then by the so-called "insurance" company. I hope that more people who have been hurt by this company come forward so that the truth becomes more widely known. Never again will I spend thousands of dollars a year on car insurance to ensure full and complete coverage. My wife's accident and how she was treated by Allstate shows just what a farce car insurance really is.

"There is no incentive for insurance companies to do what is right, such as live up to the promises made in their policies. Tort reformers fueled by insurance money think big business and the insurance industry need to be protected against "runaway juries." It's the other way around. Big business and the insurance industry have always been able to take care of themselves. The little people need protection from them. This country was founded on the common law right of the little guy to get into court with his hired gun to fight the oppressor, be it big government or big business. Take that away and we have nothing left. Look around. It's being whittled away, bit by bit, caps on damages here, restrictions on jury trials there. It won't end until we recognize the enemy and join together to take a stand against them. It will take the little people to do this together".

Louis G. Fazzi, Esq. Attorney & Counselor At Law