# Did Progressive do something bad by being adverse to it's insured? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 17, 2012, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772 "2012-08-17T13:11:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/41 "2012-08-17T19:25:33Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > I hope that comforts them when I cancel the auto policies I’ve carried with them for some ten years, for being a bunch of chiseling bastards. Word. I’m going to be in the market for a new car soon, and based on what I’ve seen of this affair I’ll be setting up insurance with a different company despite all the ‘perks’ Progressive’s given me over the years. ---
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/42 "2012-08-17T19:53:21Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > Word. I’m going to be in the market for a new car soon, and based on what I’ve seen of this affair I’ll be setting up insurance with a different company despite all the ‘perks’ Progressive’s given me over the years. Was one of those “perks” Flo feeding you grapes on a couch? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/43 "2012-08-17T20:04:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But by your same reasoning – Progressive lost. They had to pay. Now their former insured believes she has a case against Progressive for bad faith. Shouldn’t SHE have the right to go to court to attempt to prove that bad faith? > > Why, in other words, can Progressive’s actions be analyzed in that way, but not the injured party who believes she was the victim of bad faith? If she can make the case that Progressive acted in bad faith, then more power to her. The problem I have is with the public and posters here upset with the fact that the insurance company didn’t pay out right away, even with evidence of contributory negligence. IOW, a lot of people think that it was per se bad faith for not paying out. I don’t believe that is at all accurate. One question I have: So the other driver’s insurance paid $25k immediately. Now they are suing him? His attorney didn’t get a release for paying $25k? That seems…odd.. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/44 "2012-08-17T20:08:42Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > The problem I have is with the public and posters here upset with the fact that the insurance company didn’t pay out right away, even with evidence of contributory negligence. The evidence seems to be the testimony of the passenger who suffered brain damage in the accident. That’s an extremely shaky basis for refusing to pay. > [@](#): > > One question I have: So the other driver’s insurance paid $25k immediately. Now they are suing him? His attorney didn’t get a release for paying $25k? That seems…odd.. If I understand what you are asking, this was discussed upthread: under Maryland law, the Fishers could not sue Progressive for failing to pay the claim. They had to sue the other driver and get a ruling that he was at fault in order to get Progressive to pay up. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/45 "2012-08-17T20:09:28Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > That seems…odd.. Now THAT’S grounds for a bad faith suit. No release:no money, babe. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/46 "2012-08-17T20:21:24Z")
> [@Inigo\_Montoya](#): > > Example:In Maryland, if a party is 1% at fault, they are NOT legally entitled to collect anything. Signature on a contract is generally considered as evidence the contract has been read. “Nobody reads those things” is a flimsy defense against looking out for yourself. Maybe everyone should read the policy they’re paying for rather than just assuming it will perform according to their whim. If Nationwide agreed to pay the original $25k, can we still say that Fisher was not legally entitled to collect anything? ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/47 "2012-08-17T20:28:44Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > If Nationwide agreed to pay the original $25k, can we still say that Fisher was not legally entitled to collect anything? Fair question. 1. Many (most? all?) releases include language to the effect of “liability is not admitted, you’re taking $x in exchange for surrendering your right to pursue our insured for damages.” Payment is an admission of nothing at all apart from one party’s willingness to pay and another’s willingness to accept the payment under the terms specefied. Nationwide may think the chances of their insured receiving a verdict in excess of his policy limits was too big a risk to expose their insured to, and so paid the $25k even though there was a chance the other driver might have some liability. 2. Nationwide may have actually believed their insured was 100% at fault. Progressive has the right to disagree. We have the civil court system and various mediation organizations in place to resolve disagreements. People interpret information differently. ---
**Author:** ![Rachellelogram](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rachellelogram/32/8689_2.png) [@Rachellelogram](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rachellelogram)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/48 "2012-08-17T21:49:08Z")
I don’t really see why everyone is saying that Progressive should have seen this PR nightmare coming. Insurance companies deal with a huge number of attorney-repped clients every day, and a significant number of trials every year. Who could have predicted that social media would blow up \*this \*particular case? Insurance companies deny hundreds or thousands of claims every _day_. How many of those have become famous in recent memory? None that I can think of, that’s for sure. Progressive is my carrier, and I won’t be canceling my policy. But then, I work for an insurance company, so none of this shocked me. Additionally, I can’t agree that the outrage over this is commensurate to the “offense” they committed. Any insurance company would have done the same thing in their place. Do you really think Progressive is so bad? They’re all the same. It sucks, but I have a car so I can’t just not pay into it. Personally, I think the way auto insurers’ primary customers are their shareholders, rather than their customers, is borderline-unethical and fucking reprehensible. My company’s CEO is at least half-reptilian, ok (and I don’t work for Progressive). But there isn’t an auto insurance company out there that doesn’t do this! It’s six of one, or half a dozen of the other. Don’t people \*\*see \*\*that? ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/49 "2012-08-17T21:52:49Z")
> [@Rachellelogram](#): > > Don’t people \*\*see \*\*that? Perhaps. But the optimist in me says that if these practices become known to the public, and the public states quite clearly, whether through dropping their Progressive insurance or by speaking out, that such practices are reprehensible, we might start seeing a shift in insurance practices. One can hope, anyway. I see no evidence that the auto insurance industry is not run by sentient but soulless AIs who hate human life. ---
**Author:** ![denquixote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9bd4f/32.png) [@denquixote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/denquixote)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/50 "2012-08-17T21:57:14Z")
> [@just\_some\_guy5](#): > > Any idea why his insurer accepted that he was at fault? I almost wonder if his insurer figured $25k wasn’t worth going to court over, regardless of how “at fault” he was. Did not exactly work for him though did it? Nationwide was still responsible for defending him at trial. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/51 "2012-08-17T22:59:59Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > …such practices are reprehensible… Ok, let’s start here. Which practices? Conforming to the letter and spirit of their policy contracts and state laws? Or not paying claims they don’t owe? Sorry, that was snarky. But I am interested to know what Progressive did that was wrong and particularly soulless (apart from making, based on the facts as presented by abc, an unwise liability decision). Oh, and there really is a difference between publicly-traded insurance companies and mutual insurance companies. The former bows to its shareholders, the latter to its policyholders. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/52 "2012-08-17T23:06:23Z")
> [@Inigo\_Montoya](#): > > Ok, let’s start here. Which practices? Conforming to the letter and spirit of their policy contracts and state laws? Or not paying claims they don’t owe? > > Sorry, that was snarky. But I am interested to know what Progressive did that was wrong and particularly soulless (apart from making, based on the facts as presented by abc, an unwise liability decision). > > Oh, and there really is a difference between publicly-traded insurance companies and mutual insurance companies. The former bows to its shareholders, the latter to its policyholders. Specifically, assisting with the defense of a drunk driver who was being sued by Progressive’s own customer, and in particular because the drunk driver’s insurer had acknowledged full liability by paying what was due under the drunk’s policy. I don’t claim it to be illegal or even unusual – just disgusting. Also, choosing to rely on the testimony of a brain-injured victim with memory gaps rather than a disinterested 3rd party witness. ---
**Author:** ![Hero\_From\_Sector\_7G](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/65b543/32.png) [@Hero\_From\_Sector\_7G](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hero_From_Sector_7G)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/53 "2012-08-17T23:25:13Z")
What Boyo Jim said. The people in this thread who work for insurance companies are in too deep to see it. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/54 "2012-08-17T23:50:03Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > For those who disagree with Progressive, let’s make a hypothetical. Say the best legal experts at Progressive investigated the facts and believed, after studying past verdicts, that a jury would find the victim here 5% at fault. Should they still pay? Should they try to protect their interests by being adverse to their own insured? Why in the world would the fact that the law would side with them have anything to do with determining the morality of the situation? THE LAW IS 100% IRRELEVANT TO MORALITY. In any situation where the law is seemingly relevant to morality, one can determine the morality without using the law. The only exception is if you didn’t know the code of morals the people currently used, and had to guess using the law, and even then you are using the ethics you guessed about, and not the law itself. The very fact that so many people are upset about this action shows that this is not morally acceptable behavior. Particularly because, as stated earlier, we let insurance companies get away with a lot of stuff we would normally call unethical. So this must be a step or more above what we normally tolerate. It honestly boggles my mind that people even ask these questions. There are two methods for determining morality–from some book from on high, which pretty much requires a supernatural being who can know if something is good or bad, or via observation of the people involved. The only way you could argue this was moral after seeing the way people react is if you went with consequentialism, and I’ve not seen anyone bring that up–the idea that we are better off as a society with Progressive doing things like this. The only one I can come up with is the idea that egregious yet reversible actions help stir up the populace and cause them to fight against the immorality, thus insuring (pun intended) that various entities know where the limits are, and don’t surpass them with non-reversible actions. But do you really want to say that evil is a good thing as long as it’s not too evil and people reverse the effects? ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2012, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/55 "2012-08-18T01:16:30Z")
Peter Lewis and George Soros are the owners of Progressive. Nice to see these two left wing bastards looking out for the little people. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2012, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/56 "2012-08-18T07:15:13Z")
> [@Inigo\_Montoya](#): > > Ok, let’s start here. Which practices? **Boyo Jim** covered it well. The policies of insurance companies (as opposed to insurance policies) are 100% rational and 100% inhumane. Insurance was devised as a way to aid people in paying for bills they had no reasonable way to afford, but insurance companies fight tooth and nail beyond reasonable bounds to stick their customers with those bills anyway. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2012, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/57 "2012-08-18T20:46:29Z")
I could see some pretty funny parodies of their “Now that’s progressive” slogan coming out of this whole affair: “Supporting the defense of a driver who ran a red light and is being sued by your customer…Now, that’s progressive!” > [@badger5149](#): > > Peter Lewis and George Soros are the owners of Progressive. Nice to see these two left wing bastards looking out for the little people. Actually, this is apparently only half-true if the answer [here](http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Does_George_Soros_control_own_or_run_Progressive_Insurance_Company) is to be believed. Peter Lewis is the Chairman and is an associate of Soros but Soros apparently is not involved with Progressive. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2012, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/58 "2012-08-18T20:48:33Z")
> [@Rachellelogram](#): > > Any insurance company would have done the same thing in their place. Do you really think Progressive is so bad? They’re all the same. That’s depressing…Makes me want to go and shoot myself. Oh wait, then they’ll reneg on paying my life insurance policy. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/59 "2012-08-19T02:15:04Z")
> [@Rachellelogram](#): > > I don’t really see why everyone is saying that Progressive should have seen this PR nightmare coming. Insurance companies deal with a huge number of attorney-repped clients every day, and a significant number of trials every year. Who could have predicted that social media would blow up \*this \*particular case? Insurance companies deny hundreds or thousands of claims every _day_. How many of those have become famous in recent memory? None that I can think of, that’s for sure. > > Progressive is my carrier, and I won’t be canceling my policy. But then, I work for an insurance company, so none of this shocked me. Additionally, I can’t agree that the outrage over this is commensurate to the “offense” they committed. Any insurance company would have done the same thing in their place. Do you really think Progressive is so bad? They’re all the same. It sucks, but I have a car so I can’t just not pay into it. > > Personally, I think the way auto insurers’ primary customers are their shareholders, rather than their customers, is borderline-unethical and fucking reprehensible. My company’s CEO is at least half-reptilian, ok (and I don’t work for Progressive). But there isn’t an auto insurance company out there that doesn’t do this! It’s six of one, or half a dozen of the other. Don’t people \*\*see \*\*that? They’re NOT all the same. They all have different business models and they have different loss ratios as a result. I have uninsured motorist insurance as part of an umbrella policy and when someone hit my wife as she was making a left turn (at a left turn signal), they didn’t try to weasel their way out. They paid for the medical bills of everyone in the car (which fortunately was mostly ambulance charges and an overnight stay). > [@Bosstone](#): > > **Boyo Jim** covered it well. > > The policies of insurance companies (as opposed to insurance policies) are 100% rational and 100% inhumane. Insurance was devised as a way to aid people in paying for bills they had no reasonable way to afford, but insurance companies fight tooth and nail beyond reasonable bounds to stick their customers with those bills anyway. Insurance is actually just a form of communal savings. There are some expenses that are so large that most of us will not be able to pay if we encounter those expenses but the chances of incurring those expenses are also fairly remote. So for example, lets say that a housefire costs $100K. We expect one house fire per 1000 homes every 5 years. So 100 of us put $90 into a pool and let it accrete interest over 5 years so that we have 100K at the end of 5 years when we need it. Now obviously there are some flaws with the example but you get the idea. You get more out as a group than you put in because the insurance company is basically earning X% on your money and paying out claims that imply a (X-Y)% return. > [@jshore](#): > > That’s depressing…Makes me want to go and shoot myself. > > Oh wait, then they’ll reneg on paying my life insurance policy. Oddly enough this used to happen with enough frequency that every state in the country has a “non-contestability provision” After two years, a life insurance company is not simply not permitted to try to weasel their way out of paying, even in the case of suicide (if the beneficiary murders the insured, the beneficiary cannot get the proceeds but the policy still gets paid out to other beneficiaries or heirs). ---
**Author:** ![Ruby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/13edae/32.png) [@Ruby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruby)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772/60 "2012-08-19T03:01:58Z")
> [@Inigo\_Montoya](#): > > Eh, those are niggling little details that I personally wouldn’t pay much mind to in making a liability call. But here’s one for you. > > Large intersection, both roads have 2 lanes in each direction plus a left turn lane. (draw this one). > > V1 is travelling southbound in the far right lane at the posted speed limit of 40mph, V2 is travelling westbound in the far left lane, “like a bat out of hell” according to a witness, and enters the intersection with a green light. V1 runs a red light and V2’s left headlight strikes the left rear corner of V1’s bumper. > > In practice, I’m putting at least 75% on V1 for violating the light. However, the impact points on both cars demonstrate V1 was _almost_ able to get out of V2’s way. Assuming all drivers have a duty be drive with vigilance, was there anything V2 could have done to avoid the collision? A witness would be a huge help here. If the witness says V2 was on her brakes hard and almost avoided the collision, that’s one thing. On the other hand, if V2 driver says V1 came “from out of nowhere” then I’m going to entertain the possibility she might have _some_ liability for improper lookout. Maybe as much as 25% but probably less depending on how credible I think both drivers are. Unfortunately in a handful of places in the US, I don’t even have to sell 25%, just 1% before I have to tell V2 she has no claimagainst V1. I’m reading this and thinking, “wow, this person must know claims”, then I saw who was posting. **fistbump** > [@Inigo\_Montoya](#): > > This is very offensive to those of us in the industry so…Cite? Not one or two examples, but something showing, as you say, this occurring almost every time. Amen! Insurance is regulated by the laws of the state where the accident occurred. We are not given bonuses based on how many claims we deny. I hate to tell a customer that I cannot pay their claim. I do it, and I’m good at it, but I still don’t like it. > [@Bosstone](#): > > Word. I’m going to be in the market for a new car soon, and based on what I’ve seen of this affair I’ll be setting up insurance with a different company despite all the ‘perks’ Progressive’s given me over the years. Theoretically, every company in this state would have handled this the same way. If there was a question of liability on the part of the insured, any insurer has the _duty_ to their policyholders/stockholders to assess liability appropriately. > [@Bosstone](#): > > **Boyo Jim** covered it well. > > The policies of insurance companies (as opposed to insurance policies) are 100% rational and 100% inhumane. Insurance was devised as a way to aid people in paying for bills they had no reasonable way to afford, but insurance companies fight tooth and nail beyond reasonable bounds to stick their customers with those bills anyway. Think what you will, but after 35 years in this business, I’ve never seen a company “fight tooth and nail beyond reasonable bounds” to not pay a claim. The companies that I’ve worked for go out of their way to _find_ coverage, not deny it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-progressive-do-something-bad-by-being-adverse-to-its-insured/631772.md?page=4)