Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills
Post Reply
scorcher31
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:13 pm

Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by scorcher31 » Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:50 pm

I know we have quite a few physicians at bogleheads and I just wanted to get some thoughts. My current malpractice policy provided by my hospital covers only up to $1 million per claim. In NJ, my home and taxable accounts aren't protected but my ira and 401k are. I can't do a large individual 401k or I would as I am an employee, and don't do private practice. Currently I don't have any malpractice claims and, don't have enough taxable assets for it to be worth it to do anything different, but I'd like to figure it out now before I get anywhere near my limit in unprotected assets.

Do hospitals negotiate to increase malpractice limits? They seem they raise my salary but none of my benefits (pto, malpractice cap, etc.) Is there an agency that will give me a few million more on top of the 1 million sort of like an umbrella policy? I feel like this must be a common occurrence so I would appreciate any input.

On a side note, if you fund a taxable account only in your spouses name from a joint bank account where we both deposit checks, would that taxable account be protected from creditors against me?
Last edited by scorcher31 on Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Doctor Rhythm
Posts: 166
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:55 am

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by Doctor Rhythm » Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:06 am

I am employed by a very large public (state university) medical school/hospital system. I'm also covered by their insurance, and do not carry any separate or additional malpractice insurance. I don't know of any colleagues who do either. The standard operating procedure at my institution in the event of a lawsuit is for the medical center to try to get individual physicians taken off the defendant list and have the institution named as the sole defendant. As a result, I am not aware of individual faculty being financially liable in the event of a successful suit.

Your situation may be different though. You might want to talk to your hospital's risk management office to understand how they handle situations where employed physicians are named in a suit and whether additional insurance is recommended. You can also talk with your colleagues to see what they do.

User avatar
gasdoc
Posts: 1537
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2014 8:26 am

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by gasdoc » Mon Jun 25, 2018 6:48 pm

I don't know the answer to your specific question, but I will tell you that in private practice, unlike the previous response, usually the hospital is let off the suit, and the physicians are left in the end. That said, I don't know anyone that carries more than the standard limits. At least in my area, no one wants to be the one with the "deep pockets."

gasdoc

scorcher31
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by scorcher31 » Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:03 pm

I appreciate in the input from you both. Again, I think the vast majority of people in our hospital keep the standard limits for the same reason you mentioned. The hope is the lawyer would go after the hospital for anything left rather than the doctor, but I don't know what ends up happening in reality. I raised the question here because bogleheads as a whole are pretty conservative. I always see mentions of people getting multi million dollar (equal to their assets) umbrella insurance policies in case of car accidents here so figured it should be the same way for us.

Unfortunately the one malpractice company I approached told me it would be 10k a year for a 1 million dollar policy in a low risk specialty which seems crazy to me considering they would just be in excess of my hospital policy. That would cost me 300,000k in 30 years for 1 million coverage extra it does not seem to be worth it.

mhalley
Posts: 6138
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 6:02 am

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by mhalley » Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:50 pm

A couple of things:
Malpractice awards are seldom above the insurance limit.
Having a higher amount of insurance would just make you a target.
. Carry an appropriate amount of malpractice insurance for the same reasons. Most of us worry about a malpractice suit ruining us financially. The truth is very few malpractice claims exceed the physician’s malpractice insurance policy limits, and those that do usually could have been settled for less than the policy limit.
https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/intro ... rotection/

TheNightsToCome
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:48 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by TheNightsToCome » Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:57 pm

scorcher31 wrote:
Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:03 pm
I appreciate in the input from you both. Again, I think the vast majority of people in our hospital keep the standard limits for the same reason you mentioned. The hope is the lawyer would go after the hospital for anything left rather than the doctor, but I don't know what ends up happening in reality. I raised the question here because bogleheads as a whole are pretty conservative. I always see mentions of people getting multi million dollar (equal to their assets) umbrella insurance policies in case of car accidents here so figured it should be the same way for us.

Unfortunately the one malpractice company I approached told me it would be 10k a year for a 1 million dollar policy in a low risk specialty which seems crazy to me considering they would just be in excess of my hospital policy. That would cost me 300,000k in 30 years for 1 million coverage extra it does not seem to be worth it.
Malpractice claims are common, but it's my understanding that physicians lose only a small percentage of those, and very few claims exceed standard malpractice limits.

Rather than worry about add'l malpractice insurance, I recommend:

1. Focus on thorough documentation and good relationships with patients.

2. Meet with an estate planning attorney and discuss asset protection as part of a comprehensive estate plan.

scorcher31
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by scorcher31 » Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:15 pm

I am aware most malpractice suits don't go to trial and those that do frequently side with the physician. I also know that the payouts usually are not over limits, but what is different about malpractice that this is the case? Why are people happy taking a million or less from a doctor but go for multiple million in a MVA. Again i know it's common to recommend umbrella policies for homeowners/auto with multi million dollar policies?

I understand the concept of how to decrease risk from a clinical prospective. I am in a "low risk specialty" statistically, but it is somewhat unpredictable with the possibility of very bad outcomes at times. My one fear is putting away a nice retirement fund in taxable, choosing to continue working because I like what I do, and then having someone take me for it all prior to retirement.

This leads to my question about how to appropriately protect myself from this situation boglehead style. Currently looking for insurance input, but I would be interested in what other physicians do. I have no interest in property besides my home, I don't have a private practice, I max out tax sheltered/creditor protected accounts. I want to keep things as simple and inexpensive as possible. I assume an estate attorney would say to set up a irrevocable trust or something to that sort, but I hear they are expensive to maintain, don't know how much protection they would truly offer, and how easy it would be to constantly be putting money in and access whenever I want.

TheNightsToCome
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:48 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by TheNightsToCome » Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:59 pm

scorcher31 wrote:
Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:15 pm
I am aware most malpractice suits don't go to trial and those that do frequently side with the physician. I also know that the payouts usually are not over limits, but what is different about malpractice that this is the case? Why are people happy taking a million or less from a doctor but go for multiple million in a MVA. Again i know it's common to recommend umbrella policies for homeowners/auto with multi million dollar policies?

I understand the concept of how to decrease risk from a clinical prospective. I am in a "low risk specialty" statistically, but it is somewhat unpredictable with the possibility of very bad outcomes at times. My one fear is putting away a nice retirement fund in taxable, choosing to continue working because I like what I do, and then having someone take me for it all prior to retirement.

This leads to my question about how to appropriately protect myself from this situation boglehead style. Currently looking for insurance input, but I would be interested in what other physicians do. I have no interest in property besides my home, I don't have a private practice, I max out tax sheltered/creditor protected accounts. I want to keep things as simple and inexpensive as possible. I assume an estate attorney would say to set up a irrevocable trust or something to that sort, but I hear they are expensive to maintain, don't know how much protection they would truly offer, and how easy it would be to constantly be putting money in and access whenever I want.
A Google search indicates that New Jersey allows ownership as Tenants by the Entirety, so this is an option if you are married. It's my understanding that this will provide protection against a malpractice claim (and other lawsuits) brought against you but not your wife/husband. However, I'm not a lawyer. This is the sort of thing you can discuss with your attorney. He/she may be able to suggest similar (better?) cost-effective measures that you can implement.

scorcher31
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by scorcher31 » Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:31 pm

TheNightsToCome wrote:
Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:59 pm

A Google search indicates that New Jersey allows ownership as Tenants by the Entirety, so this is an option if you are married. It's my understanding that this will provide protection against a malpractice claim (and other lawsuits) brought against you but not your wife/husband. However, I'm not a lawyer. This is the sort of thing you can discuss with your attorney. He/she may be able to suggest similar (better?) cost-effective measures that you can implement.
So it says in Nj law that it covers real and personal property. It's not mentioned that much, I know homes are generally titled like that in NJ. It's less clear if they cover brokerage in that manner. I know I had the option when I signed up for vanguard and I did select that option, but who knows if it really will work in NJ. It's not nearly as clear cut as some other states. A lot of sites say, regular estate planning attorneys aren't adequate and you need complicated multi tier insulation involing llc, family partnership, trusts etc all roled into one which sounds incredibly expensive and not worthwhile for a few million. There are also articles that seem to say a judge can simply wave aside LLC and other tax protection strategies if they feel you are just tryign to protect your assets from creditors. In the end I will very likely consult with an attorney, but this won't be for a few years until I get something saved up. Anyways still open to everyone elses thoughts, strategies, etc.

Rwsawbones
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:21 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by Rwsawbones » Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:33 pm

Coverage that is now available is the same as was offered in the mid 1970s namely $1 million dollars per incident and a maximum of $3 million dollars for all incidents in a given year. A mal occurrence involving resulting long term disability and/or ruining the earning power of say a high powered financial professional can result in potentially high recoveries from a medical professional. To some extent the low limits of the insurance makes MDs less desirable subjects for the plaintiffs bar

I recommend that one obtain the highest available and affect affordable coverage. Practicing the best and most compassionate care goes without saying. But even with the best care there is the danger that the doctor may be on the losing side of a huge judgment.

Al doctors should consult wih attorneys expert in asset protection. There are some assets that cannot be easily attached such as profit sharing plans , 403 B , 401k and to some extent IRAs. If one has a low risk spouse that spouses investments should be titled in his or her name. In some states
Life insurance policies have assets protection. The family home in some states can be owned as tenants by the entirety which give some asset protection. Declaration of homestead protects equity in a home the amount depending on the state. You should consult a good asset protection attorney expert since this is an arcane subject which gotten right can save a lot of aggravation k. It is critical that such consultation be done ASAP since the law is not likely to recognize steps taken when a potential claim is pending

User avatar
White Coat Investor
Posts: 13519
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Greatest Snow On Earth

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by White Coat Investor » Tue Jun 26, 2018 12:21 am

scorcher31 wrote:
Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:50 pm
I know we have quite a few physicians at bogleheads and I just wanted to get some thoughts. My current malpractice policy provided by my hospital covers only up to $1 million per claim. In NJ, my home and taxable accounts aren't protected but my ira and 401k are. I can't do a large individual 401k or I would as I am an employee, and don't do private practice. Currently I don't have any malpractice claims and, don't have enough taxable assets for it to be worth it to do anything different, but I'd like to figure it out now before I get anywhere near my limit in unprotected assets.

Do hospitals negotiate to increase malpractice limits? They seem they raise my salary but none of my benefits (pto, malpractice cap, etc.) Is there an agency that will give me a few million more on top of the 1 million sort of like an umbrella policy? I feel like this must be a common occurrence so I would appreciate any input.

On a side note, if you fund a taxable account only in your spouses name from a joint bank account where we both deposit checks, would that taxable account be protected from creditors against me?
I asked my malpractice carrier if they'd increase my $1M policy to $2M. They laughed at me and said, "Sure, we'll take your money." But they didn't think it was a very good idea.

Bear in mind what "protected" means in the way you are using it. If you declare bankruptcy, you get to keep those assets. But you still have to go through bankruptcy. The truth is the number of successful lawsuits with a judgement exceeding malpractice after appeals is miniscule, and usually a 5 or low 6 figure amount. You probably have more than that already in unprotected assets. So you probably wouldn't even get to bankruptcy and the asset protection you already have wouldn't do any good.
1) Invest you must 2) Time is your friend 3) Impulse is your enemy | 4) Basic arithmetic works 5) Stick to simplicity 6) Stay the course

afan
Posts: 3870
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:01 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by afan » Tue Jun 26, 2018 4:58 am

Consult your current insurance company to see what it would cost to increase your coverage. If you are in a low risk specialty and few of your colleagues buy excess coverage that is probably your answer, but easy enough to check. If few people buy such insurance then the companies are confronted with an adverse selection problem. Why is this person so anxious to get more protection? Is it because they know they have a higher than average risk?

When you do your estate planning do go over this with your attorney. The tenants by entirety protection is great in states that offer it. In some states you can hold assets other than the family home as TBE but it does not offer any protection.

Bsteiner says that asset protection trusts are not worth the expense and hassle for people in typical doctor net worth. He says the net worth at which it begins to possibly make sense starts around $20M. They cost a lot to set up, have high annual expenses and it is not clear how well they work. If yours is not an asset protection state there are arguments that they would not work at all. Of course, getting at that money would involve expensive and time consuming legal work. So having a trust might help with negotiating a settlement. But you would be paying big legal bills as well.

If you set up a trust and then routinely took money out for living expenses it would not provide any protection when the time came. At least that is my understanding.

Talk with an estate planning attorney about the protection available in your state and check with your current insurer about the malpractice climate and cost of excess coverage.
We don't know how to beat the market on a risk-adjusted basis, and we don't know anyone that does know either | --Swedroe | We assume that markets are efficient, that prices are right | --Fama

scorcher31
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by scorcher31 » Tue Jun 26, 2018 4:50 pm

I really appreciate all the input... It's just nice to get others input and hear what others are doing. I think in the end the consensus is to consult an attorney if I'm concerned. Again I'm not in a rush, but probably in a few years this is what I will end up doing.

Just to reply to a couple of the recent comments:
Rwsawbones wrote:
Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:33 pm
Coverage that is now available is the same as was offered in the mid 1970s namely $1 million dollars per incident and a maximum of $3 million dollars for all incidents in a given year. A mal occurrence involving resulting long term disability and/or ruining the earning power of say a high powered financial professional can result in potentially high recoveries from a medical professional. To some extent the low limits of the insurance makes MDs less desirable subjects for the plaintiffs bar

I recommend that one obtain the highest available and affect affordable coverage. Practicing the best and most compassionate care goes without saying. But even with the best care there is the danger that the doctor may be on the losing side of a huge judgment.
Yes, you articulated this better than me, but the fact that limits haven't raised is partly my concern, as well as the inability to cheaply increase it. My concern would be, What if I'm sitting with 5 million in taxable at the end of my career (nowhere near there now) and I only have a 1 million policy it might make me a large target
White Coat Investor wrote:
Tue Jun 26, 2018 12:21 am
I asked my malpractice carrier if they'd increase my $1M policy to $2M. They laughed at me and said, "Sure, we'll take your money." But they didn't think it was a very good idea.

Bear in mind what "protected" means in the way you are using it. If you declare bankruptcy, you get to keep those assets. But you still have to go through bankruptcy. The truth is the number of successful lawsuits with a judgement exceeding malpractice after appeals is miniscule, and usually a 5 or low 6 figure amount. You probably have more than that already in unprotected assets. So you probably wouldn't even get to bankruptcy and the asset protection you already have wouldn't do any good.
I always value your input WCI. It has been immensely helpful in getting off to the right start financially. Thank you for asking your carrier and It's good to hear that response from them. My understanding was always that payouts in general were low, and when they occur usually a physicians personal assets are not involved. I saw a couple of websites that said 2% of payouts include a physicians assets but forget where I read that, which concerned me somewhat. Never thought about the fact that that amount may still be quite low. If the payout was a 5 or low 6 figure amount at the end of my career it wouldn't be a concern at all so that's really helpful to hear. The "fear", and it's probably just that, is a 7 figure payout possibly draining all unprotected assets.
afan wrote:
Tue Jun 26, 2018 4:58 am
Consult your current insurance company to see what it would cost to increase your coverage. If you are in a low risk specialty and few of your colleagues buy excess coverage that is probably your answer, but easy enough to check. If few people buy such insurance then the companies are confronted with an adverse selection problem. Why is this person so anxious to get more protection? Is it because they know they have a higher than average risk?

When you do your estate planning do go over this with your attorney. The tenants by entirety protection is great in states that offer it. In some states you can hold assets other than the family home as TBE but it does not offer any protection.

Bsteiner says that asset protection trusts are not worth the expense and hassle for people in typical doctor net worth. He says the net worth at which it begins to possibly make sense starts around $20M. They cost a lot to set up, have high annual expenses and it is not clear how well they work. If yours is not an asset protection state there are arguments that they would not work at all. Of course, getting at that money would involve expensive and time consuming legal work. So having a trust might help with negotiating a settlement. But you would be paying big legal bills as well.

If you set up a trust and then routinely took money out for living expenses it would not provide any protection when the time came. At least that is my understanding.

Talk with an estate planning attorney about the protection available in your state and check with your current insurer about the malpractice climate and cost of excess coverage.
Unfortunately my hospital is self insured, which I realize if they went under that would pose an issue although statute of limitations is only 2 years and pretty strict in this state so I'm not horribly concerned. They do not give me the option of paying to increase the limit they just say all of the doctors are the same. I checked another insurance company with my professional assocation and was told it would be 10K after a few years for a 1 million policy that goes into effect after my hospitals policy is tapped. They don't give any discount for me already having a 1 million policy in place. As I said that would mean 300k over 30 years so to me probably not worth it.

Yeah I am holding funds in TBE at Vanguard, but don't know in my state if that will hold any protection. Just another reason to speak with an attorney. NJ is pretty creditor friendly state, and I have the same concern that an attorney would attempt to sell complicated asset protection vehicles (like a financial advisor) that are not truly appropriate and would not hold up in this state. I have heard the same about trusts that for a few million they are not really worth it financially and again might not hold up.

Tachyon
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by Tachyon » Tue Jun 26, 2018 11:11 pm

In addition to simply the amount covered, you should investigate into how your carrier typically handle claims and what their general M.O. is. You also have to evaluate what your own M.O. is. For instance, if a completely baseless claim where you were not negligent in any way but the patient has a very bad outcome, would you eat your pride and just settle? Or would you want to defend yourself? Keeping in mind every settlement gets entered into the National Practitioner's Databank. My carrier has more or less told me that there is virtually no chance my own assets would be touched as long as I was willing to settle. If I decide I want to settle within insurance limits no matter what, but the insurance company decides to defend the case, then they are on hook for any overpayments. However, if they advise I settle, but I want to pursue defense, then that's when I'm on the hook. I've spoken to the president of my carrier (who has practiced 40 years in this industry), who has told me he's only heard of one case where the physician was personally but it involved "egregious medical treatment" (whatever that means...I didn't ask for details).

golfCaddy
Posts: 722
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:02 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by golfCaddy » Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:13 pm

scorcher31 wrote:
Tue Jun 26, 2018 4:50 pm

Yes, you articulated this better than me, but the fact that limits haven't raised is partly my concern, as well as the inability to cheaply increase it. My concern would be, What if I'm sitting with 5 million in taxable at the end of my career (nowhere near there now) and I only have a 1 million policy it might make me a large target.
About $5M in taxable making you a target, anyone can find out where you live, your age, and your medical speciality with a quick Google search. A more in depth search could turn up rental properties and vacation homes. However, no one is going to know how much money you have at Vanguard unless you go around bragging about it or posting all you financial details online. Driving a Porsche, living in an expensive home, and being in a highly compensated speciality, all have more to do with whether you're a "target" or not than how much you have in taxable, passive investments.

aquaman
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 2:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by aquaman » Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:39 am

White Coat Investor wrote:
Tue Jun 26, 2018 12:21 am
Bear in mind what "protected" means in the way you are using it. If you declare bankruptcy, you get to keep those assets.
I can't tell if you just phrased it in a way that doesn't read quite right (I think it's just about the wording, as I think your statement was only meant to apply to the types of assets that enjoy creditor protection in bankruptcy), but just in case people are confused about this, if you have non-exempt assets (funds in 401(k)'s, for instance, are generally protected from creditors), a bankruptcy filing does not allow you to keep those assets.

In other words, if you have $1MM sitting in a taxable Vanguard account, you can't simply wipe out a $1MM judgment against you by declaring bankruptcy and keeping your $1MM Vanguard account.
golfCaddy wrote:
Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:13 pm
However, no one is going to know how much money you have at Vanguard unless you go around bragging about it or posting all you financial details online.
The information is still very easily discoverable. If you ever have the misfortune of facing a significant claim, the plaintiffs won't just stop at googling you, at which point a non flashy lifestyle won't do much to keep them from finding out about your assets.
scorcher31 wrote:
Tue Jun 26, 2018 4:50 pm
I checked another insurance company with my professional assocation and was told it would be 10K after a few years for a 1 million policy that goes into effect after my hospitals policy is tapped.
Be sure to ask them whether this would be for a claims based or an occurrence based policy. If it's a claims based one, you would also need to consider the cost of a tail.

http://www.scjua.com/coverage-we-provid ... ce-policy/
https://www.cphins.com/3-differences-be ... -coverage/
https://www.trustinsurance.com/faq/liab ... occurrence
Tachyon wrote:
Tue Jun 26, 2018 11:11 pm
My carrier has more or less told me that there is virtually no chance my own assets would be touched as long as I was willing to settle.
This is only true to the extent the plaintiff is willing to settle within your insurance limits. That's where the policy limits come into play, as a relatively low policy limit may not give you and the insurance carrier sufficient leverage to incentivize a plaintiff to settle within those limits.

afan
Posts: 3870
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:01 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by afan » Thu Jun 28, 2018 10:34 am

It also depends on the details of the malpractice climate in your specialty in your region. Your insurance carrier will know this. If they feel confident that your risk is low, then I would accept that. For a doc, trying to read up on a few high profile cases gives a very limited view of what goes on. You want to know how many cases are filed, how many are meritorious, how many settle, for how much, how many go to trial, how often the physician loses, and what the ultimate payments are (high initial awards are often reduced on appeal or negotiated to lower amounts). As a physician you do not have access to this information and you carrier will not tell you. But if you are lucky your carrier will give you some indication of your risk.

In effect, you get a consult on your malpractice exposure, from the most informed source possible, for free.
We don't know how to beat the market on a risk-adjusted basis, and we don't know anyone that does know either | --Swedroe | We assume that markets are efficient, that prices are right | --Fama

golfCaddy
Posts: 722
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:02 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by golfCaddy » Thu Jun 28, 2018 5:42 pm

aquaman wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:39 am
golfCaddy wrote:
Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:13 pm
However, no one is going to know how much money you have at Vanguard unless you go around bragging about it or posting all you financial details online.
The information is still very easily discoverable. If you ever have the misfortune of facing a significant claim, the plaintiffs won't just stop at googling you, at which point a non flashy lifestyle won't do much to keep them from finding out about your assets.
No, it's not. What do you think they're going to do? Hire someone to hack into your Vanguard accounts? Burglarize your home and steal your laptop? Go dumpster diving every day in your trash, on the off chance you threw away financial statements and didn't bother to shred them? We're talking about a plaintiff in an auto accident, not some intelligence agency in a 007 movie.

scorcher31
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by scorcher31 » Thu Jun 28, 2018 6:30 pm

golfCaddy wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 5:42 pm
aquaman wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:39 am
golfCaddy wrote:
Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:13 pm
However, no one is going to know how much money you have at Vanguard unless you go around bragging about it or posting all you financial details online.
The information is still very easily discoverable. If you ever have the misfortune of facing a significant claim, the plaintiffs won't just stop at googling you, at which point a non flashy lifestyle won't do much to keep them from finding out about your assets.
No, it's not. What do you think they're going to do? Hire someone to hack into your Vanguard accounts? Burglarize your home and steal your laptop? Go dumpster diving every day in your trash, on the off chance you threw away financial statements and didn't bother to shred them? We're talking about a plaintiff in an auto accident, not some intelligence agency in a 007 movie.
Can't they order a declaration of assets legally? To my knowledge if the person alledges 2 million of malpractice damages and you only have a 1 million dollar policy you can get forced to decalare all of your personal assetts before they actually come to a final verdict. If I understand this wrong please let me know

golfCaddy
Posts: 722
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:02 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by golfCaddy » Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:20 pm

scorcher31 wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 6:30 pm
Can't they order a declaration of assets legally? To my knowledge if the person alledges 2 million of malpractice damages and you only have a 1 million dollar policy you can get forced to decalare all of your personal assetts before they actually come to a final verdict. If I understand this wrong please let me know
They can't order you to disclose your assets without a verdict in excess of your policy limits.

aquaman
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 2:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by aquaman » Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:27 pm

golfCaddy wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 5:42 pm
aquaman wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:39 am
golfCaddy wrote:
Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:13 pm
However, no one is going to know how much money you have at Vanguard unless you go around bragging about it or posting all you financial details online.
The information is still very easily discoverable. If you ever have the misfortune of facing a significant claim, the plaintiffs won't just stop at googling you, at which point a non flashy lifestyle won't do much to keep them from finding out about your assets.
No, it's not. What do you think they're going to do? Hire someone to hack into your Vanguard accounts? Burglarize your home and steal your laptop? Go dumpster diving every day in your trash, on the off chance you threw away financial statements and didn't bother to shred them? We're talking about a plaintiff in an auto accident, not some intelligence agency in a 007 movie.
They simply subpoena your financial records.

aquaman
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 2:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by aquaman » Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:35 pm

golfCaddy wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:20 pm
scorcher31 wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 6:30 pm
Can't they order a declaration of assets legally? To my knowledge if the person alledges 2 million of malpractice damages and you only have a 1 million dollar policy you can get forced to decalare all of your personal assetts before they actually come to a final verdict. If I understand this wrong please let me know
They can't order you to disclose your assets without a verdict in excess of your policy limits.
That's not necessarily true, as it really depends on a number of variables. Regardless though, it makes no difference, as in the event that the lawsuit is settled or otherwise resolved within your insurance limits, it won't make a difference. If it's not, and the plaintiff decides to pursue your personal assets, that's the point at which your non exempt assets can be pursued.

A seemingly modest lifestyle simply isn't going to do anything to cause a plaintiff suing a physician or another white collar professional to drop it or to settle it within the insurance limits.

golfCaddy
Posts: 722
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:02 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by golfCaddy » Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:39 pm

aquaman wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:27 pm
They simply subpoena your financial records.
Except, they can't do that without a verdict in excess of your policy limits.

scorcher31
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by scorcher31 » Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:06 pm

golfCaddy wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:39 pm
aquaman wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:27 pm
They simply subpoena your financial records.
Except, they can't do that without a verdict in excess of your policy limits.
Good to know. I was under the impression that they were able to get this disclose prior to the final verdict.

aquaman
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 2:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by aquaman » Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:30 pm

golfCaddy wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:39 pm
aquaman wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:27 pm
They simply subpoena your financial records.
Except, they can't do that without a verdict in excess of your policy limits.
As I already mentioned above, this is not necessarily true, as it depends on a number of variables. As I also mentioned above, either way it doesn't exactly help you.

golfCaddy
Posts: 722
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:02 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by golfCaddy » Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:43 pm

aquaman wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:30 pm
golfCaddy wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:39 pm
aquaman wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 7:27 pm
They simply subpoena your financial records.
Except, they can't do that without a verdict in excess of your policy limits.
As I already mentioned above, this is not necessarily true, as it depends on a number of variables. As I also mentioned above, either way it doesn't exactly help you.
It's almost always true, and I'm not sure what your point is anyway. Obviously, the plaintiff can pursue your personal assets if they have a verdict against you in excess of your policy limits. That completely ignores the original question, which is whether a plaintiff will decide to settle for your policy limits or go to trial seeking more.

aquaman
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 2:13 pm

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by aquaman » Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:44 pm

golfCaddy wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:43 pm
That completely ignores the original question, which is whether a plaintiff will decide to settle for your policy limits or go to trial seeking more.
It doesn't sound like anything I say or explan is going to cause you to accept the explanation, which is perfectly fine. My recommendation is for you to have a chat with a few litigators to understand the types of factors that go into these types of settlement decisions.

User avatar
ram
Posts: 1085
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 10:47 pm
Location: Midwest

Re: Second malpractice insurance necessary?

Post by ram » Thu Jun 28, 2018 11:38 pm

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1012370

Read this NEJM article before making any decisions.
Ram

Post Reply