Tag: Bahri v. IDS

Jordan Jones, a Michigan Auto Law attorney, serves as a plaintiffs’ lawyer No Fault expert for ICLE program on 2017’s No Fault law decisions

Lawyers who process clients’ attendant care claims MUST fact-check before submitting No-Fault forms to insurers, who are only too eager to allege fraud over the most innocent of mistakes

Pro-insurance rulings, misuse and abuse of No-Fault system by insurers, defense lawyers and adjusters, politicians’ pro-insurance, anti-consumer ‘reform’ plans threaten to gut of the best insurance system in the nation

Car crash victim didn’t commit No-Fault fraud based on alleged “discrepancies” from surveillance evidence

Crooked IME doctors, bad faith litigation policies and insurance-friendly double-standards from our courts have emboldened auto insurers to step-up denials and illegal cut-offs without cause

Robert Raitt will speak at ICLE’s annual No-Fault Summit about common pitfalls from the plaintiff’s perspective when adjusting a No-Fault PIP claim

The ‘Bahri’ decision is scaring doctors from treating car crash victims and their injuries. A real fix can only come from the Michigan Legislature

Mistakes, ‘inconsistent’ or ‘erroneous’ statements not enough to show ‘fraudulent intent’ in claims for replacement services, wage loss benefits under No-Fault

Insurance company can’t use ‘inconsistent statements’ alone to deny No-Fault PIP benefits to injured car crash victim, says MCOA in No-Fault fraud ruling