Yet another force-placed insurance action is now proceeding in federal court against CitiMortgage, CitiGroup, American Security Insurance Company, and Assurant, Inc. The claim alleges the CitiMortgage (including CitiGroup and CitiBank) engaged in deceptive practices when force-placing insurance policies on borrowers, including violations of the Truth in Lending Act, the RICO Act, and other consumer protection laws.
SunTrust Force-Placed Insurance
Force-Placed Insurance (sometimes called Lender-Placed Insurance) is a practice of many big banks, large lenders, and loan servicers, where these institutions forcefully charge a borrower for hazard insurance, wind insurance, and/or flood insurance when lenders, including SunTrust Mortgage, or servicers believe the insurance coverage has either lapsed or is not sufficient. Most standard residential mortgages require borrowers to maintain homeowners insurance, flood insurance, or wind insurance on his or her residence. If the borrower fails to do so, SunTrust Mortgage (or SunTrust Bank) will purchase force-placed hazard insurance, force-placed wind insurance, or force-placed flood insurance to allegedly protect SunTrust’s “financial interest.” The premiums for SunTrust force-placed insurance policies typically cost as high as 10 times the amount of normal insurance policy. SunTrust Mortgage claim these excessive premiums are the responsibility of the borrower and typically tack them onto the borrower’s loan. This is true for force-placed hazard insurance, force-placed flood insurance, and force-placed wind insurance.
A man who claims he suffered hip fractures after taking Prevacid® will be allowed to proceed with a Prevacid® lawsuit against the makers of the popular heartburn drug. On October 19, 2012, a federal judge in Pennsylvania refused to dismiss David Tatum’s Prevacid® lawsuit, and also let stand his demand for punitive damages. Mr. Tatum is being represented by the national consumer protection law firm Gilman Law LLP.
Are the “Best Price” guarantees touted by Expedia, Priceline, Orbitz, Travelocity and other online travel websites something would-be travelers should count on? Maybe not, the Consumer Law team at Gilman Law LLP has recently filed a hotel room rate price-fixing lawsuit on behalf of angry consumers who’ve alleged that the online booking sites colluded with large hotel chains, including Starwood Hotels & Resorts, Marriott International, Hilton Worldwide, Intercontinental, and others to fix the prices of hotel rooms. According to these lawsuits, the pricing guarantees offered by the likes of Expedia, Priceline, Orbits and Travelocity are nothing more than illusions, and comparison shopping on these sites is a waste of time.
Consumers who were spammed with a text message from Jiffy Lube last year will soon reap the benefits of a class action lawsuit that was filed on their behalf. Jiffy Lube franchisee Heartland Automotive Service has agreed to pay $47 million to settle claims in the text spam lawsuit that the text message violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
A woman from Fresno, California who took the drug Actos for 8 years has filed suit in California Superior Court alleging the type 2 diabetes drug caused her to develop bladder cancer. The Plaintiff, who is being represented by Gilman Law LLP, a national law firm representing individuals with Actos injuries, continued taking Actos for two years after her bladder cancer diagnoses, and claims that Takeda Pharmaceuticals and other Defendants failed to provide adequate warnings about the drug’s life-threatening side effects.
Johnson & Johnson and its Ethicon unit have been named in yet another transvaginal mesh lawsuit over complications allegedly caused by one of its transvaginal mesh products. In a complaint filed by Gilman Law LLP, a national law firm representing individuals with transvaginal mesh injuries, in New Jersey federal court, a Missouri woman alleges that the companies’ Gynecare Gynemesh transvaginal mesh device was defective and resulted in painful complications that forced her to undergo two additional surgeries to have the mesh removed.
A young woman from Wisconsin has filed a new Yaz side effect lawsuit against Bayer and other Defendants after suffering a type of blood clot called deep vein thrombosis that was so severe she had to have her leg amputated. The Plaintiff, who is being represented by Gilman Law LLP, a national defective drug law firm representing individuals with Yaz injuries and Yasmin injuries, claims that her injury was caused by the Yaz birth control pill.
Property owners around the country continue to file lawsuits against DuPont over its tree-killing herbicide, Imprelis. Most recently, a Minnesota property owner represented by Gilman Law LLP, a national law firm assisting individuals with tree damage from Imprelis, filed a class action lawsuit in Minnesota federal court seeking compensation for amounts paid for lawn care services, the loss of trees, and other damages on behalf of Imprelis victims in Minnesota and throughout the U.S.
Example of Imprelis Tree Damage
Imprelis is the brand name for aminocyclopyrachlor, an herbicide conditionally approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in August 2010. DuPont promised that Imprelis would provide professional landscapers with an environmentally safe way to kill unwanted broad leaf weeds, including dandelions, clovers, ground ivy, and wild violets. However, shortly after Imprelis became commercially available in the Spring of 2011, reports started coming in from Minnesota, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Delaware, Wisconsin, West Virginia and other states that trees located in proximity to Imprelis applications were either dead or dying. Most of the reports involved conifer trees, including Norway Spruce, white pine, white spruce, Colorado blue spruce, and described yellowing, browning, curling, and/or dieback of current-season growth. In the most severe cases, entire trees turned brown and began to loose their needles.
Both DuPont and the EPA launched investigations that summer, and on August 4, 2011, the EPA issued a Stop Sale & Removal Order to DuPont, effectively banning Imprelis. By the time the order was issued, DuPont had submitted more than 7,000 adverse incident reports to the EPA involving Imprelis.
Thousands of property owners who lost valuable, mature landscape trees to Imprelis have since filed suit against DuPont in a consolidated litigation now underway in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania seeking compensation for their dead and dying trees. DuPont has also set up its own claims process, and set aside $225 million for those claims that have already been submitted. The New York Times recently reported that the payout under that program could ultimately reach $575 million. However, some property owners who filed for compensation through that program told the Times that they had grown frustrated with DuPont. Apparently the process has been rather slow thus far, and DuPont’s communication with claimants has left a lot to be desired. It should also be noted that claimants who do accept compensation through this program must permanently waive their right to sue DuPont.
The lead Plaintiff in the class action lawsuit filed by Gilman Law LLP sustained damage to several trees on his property since having Imprelis applied to his lawn last year. The complaint alleges that trees can absorb Imprelis through distant, unexposed roots. As such, exposure and damage cannot be prevented by avoiding direct contact between Imprelis and the trunk and/or leaves. The lawsuit further alleges that DuPont failed to warn users that if Imprelis is applied as directed, non-target vegetation will be killed or damaged by herbicide. As a result, property owners have suffered the loss of thousands, if not tens of thousands, of mature trees.
Gilman Law LLP is still offering free legal consultations to Imprelis victims nationwide, including tree farms, residential property owners, tree nurseries and forests, golf courses, composting sites, turf managers and professional landscapers, parks, schools, and college campuses. Anyone considering filing suit against DuPont should contact the firm immediately, before their state’s statute of limitations expires, or they may miss their chance for any recovery. Gilman Law LLP also urges property owners to seek legal advice before accepting any agreement from DuPont to ensure the offer is fair. Free consultations are available by completing our Free Imprelis Consultation Form, or call Toll Free at 1-888-252-0048.
Once Tropical Storm Debby finally roars out of Florida, residents and businesses throughout the state will begin the slow and tedious work of recovery. Many will have to file claims with their insurance companies for their wind damage and other personal and business losses. Unfortunately, experience has shown that insurance companies don’t always deal fairly with Florida hurricane and tropical storm victims.
Debbie cut a wide swath of destruction throughout the state, especially in the following counties:
The term “tropical storm” hardly does justice to the damage Tropical Storm Debby left in its wake. Massive flooding from upwards of two feet of rain caused the evacuation of tens of thousands of people living in low-lying areas and near rivers, creeks and streams. Tornadoes and wind damaged and destroyed homes, and in one case, took the life of one young mother. Power outages from the storm could take weeks to resolve, and business losses could be staggering.
Thousands of Florida residents and businesses will soon be filing all manner of claims with their insurance companies, and in some cases, multiple claims. Generally speaking, claims following a hurricane or tropical storm are related to:
The extent of the damage caused by the flooding and sinkholes from Tropical Storm Debby is still unfolding. In many cases, buildings will have to be knocked down and rebuilt. Not only can this be costly, the business interruption can be devastating for small business owners. View more pictures of damage from Tropical Storm Debby.
Most homeowners and businesses in Florida purchase insurance policies that cover hurricane and storm damage, and they expect their insurer will take care of them when they are in need. But insurers may deny your claim by stating that the damage was pre-existing, caused by flood not covered under the policy, the result of neglect of the property or a failure to mitigate, or that the damage was not reported immediately. When your claim is adjusted, you may find that your insurer has failed to accurately assess the severity of the actual damage and its associated costs for repair and restoration, providing you with only a portion of the coverage you need.
If your residence or business has suffered damage from Tropical Storm Debbie, it is best to have an attorney representing your interest. An experienced law firm will work with adjusters, roofers, contractors, structural engineers, and accountants to properly document and expedite your Tropical Storm Debbie claim. Your attorney can also ensure that you are treated fairly and promptly by your insurance carrier.
Gilman Law LLP is a Florida law firm with more than 40 years of experience protecting the rights of consumers and businesses against insurance companies and other large corporations. Because our attorneys have lived and worked in Florida for decades, they understand what it takes to recover from a tropical storm like Debby. Our firm is ready right now to assist any individual or business seeking help with an insurance claim from Tropical Storm Debby.
