Consumer Watchdog | Courts

Suit Alleges California Lets Insurers Deny Treatment For Autistic Kids

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 10:23:00 PDT

A nonprofit consumer group has filed a lawsuit against state regulators alleging they allow insurance companies to deny necessary but expensive treatment for autistic children in violation of state law. Santa Monica-based Consumer Watchdog filed the lawsuit against the California Department of Managed Health Care Tuesday in Los Angeles Superior Court.

Mercury General Using Guise Of Benevolence To Assault Prop. 103

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 09:17:00 PDT

...one should wonder why Mercury, which is already one of the leading insurers in the state, would spend heavily to make its home market more competitive. I'm inclined to think the company has something else on its mind, and I'd bet that giving customers a break isn't it. Forewarned is forearmed: Hang on to your wallets.

Autism Patients' Treatment Is Denied Illegally, Group Says

Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:24:00 PDT

Consumer Watchdog asks a judge to order the state Department of Managed Health Care to enforce the law and require insurers to serve autistic members. The agency says it's doing its job.

"Californians, including those stricken with autism and their parents and caregivers, expect regulators to enforce the law, not to side with insurance companies seeking to boost their profits by denying patients the care they need," said Harvey Rosenfield, founder of the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog and author of the landmark automobile insurance reform initiative Proposition 103.

Group Sues Calif. Regulators Over Autism Care

Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:00:00 PDT

Consumer Watchdog, a Santa Monica group that monitors insurance practices, has asked the court to order the Department of Managed Health Care to require insurers to provide autistic children with treatments ordered by their doctors. The group also wants the department to turn over records showing the agency's violations in this area.

State Sued Over Handling of Autism Complaints

Wed, 01 Jul 2009 12:02:59 PDT

LOS ANGELES, CA -- California regulators are being challenged in court for siding with insurance companies, rather than patients, over some costly autism therapies. In a lawsuit filed Tuesday, consumer advocates complain that the Department of Managed Health Care broke state law by precluding expert doctors from deciding whether an insurer must provide treatments for autism.

Schwarzenegger Administration Sued for Allowing Health Insurance Companies to Deny Autism Care

Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:27:24 PDT

Santa Monica, CA -- The mother of an autistic child joined Consumer Watchdog and its attorneys today to announce a lawsuit against the California Department of Managed Health Care (“DMHC”), the Schwarzenegger Administration agency responsible for regulating many of California’s health insurers. The suit alleges that the DMHC has wrongfully allowed insurance companies to refuse to pay for autism treatments, resulting in the denial of critically needed, medically necessary treatment for autistic children.

State Agency Sued Over New Policy On Autism

Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:20:00 PDT

Consumer Watchdog filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the state agency that oversees HMOs, accusing it of violating state law by siding with insurance companies in denying treatment for children with autism. The suit accuses the department of changing its policies, forcing parents to appeal insurance denials through an internal grievance process rather than letting an independent panel of doctors make treatment decisions. "We want the department to follow the law. Doctors - not insurance companies and government lawyers - decide what care kids should get," said Jerry Flanagan, Consumer Watchdog's director of health policy.

25 Cal Republican Lawmakers Urge Supreme Court to Help Safeco Insurance

Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:33:00 PDT

In a stunning show of fealty to insurance giant Safeco, 25 Republican lawmakers have asked the California Supreme Court to overturn an appellate ruling that Safeco Insurance has to disclose the names of policyholders it may have cheated...

Cell Phone 'Choice of Law' Clause Unlawful, Judge Finds

Thu, 28 May 2009 12:16:25 PDT

Tuesday's decision was the first of its kind in a federal court that struck down the choice of law clause, said Harvey Rosenfield, a lawyer with the California-based non-profit Consumer Watchdog and co-counsel for the plaintiffs in the case, Coneff v. AT&T. "The groundbreaking part of this ruling is the federal district court understands the choice of law provision was as anti-consumer as the arbitration provision," he said. "The choice of law provision was designed by AT&T to prevent a national class action and deprive consumers in some states around the country of their right to participate in this class action."

AT&T Class Action Suit Can Proceed To Trial

Thu, 28 May 2009 10:14:00 PDT

The case was filed in Seattle in 2006 on behalf of all AT&T Wireless customers who claim they were deceived or overcharged as a result of that company's acquisition by Cingular. The lawsuit claimed that these customers found they had to buy new equipment, move to higher cost plans, and, in some cases, pay an $18 "transfer" or "upgrade" fee. "This is a major victory for AT&T customers all over the nation," said Harvey Rosenfield, a lawyer for California-based Consumer Watchdog , a nonprofit group.

U.S. Court Rules Class Action Against AT&T Can Go On

Wed, 27 May 2009 15:28:00 PDT

Class action on Cingular/AT&T deal allowed to proceed -- Customers say being forced to pay fees, buy phones.

Consumer advocacy group Consumer Watchdog described the ruling as a major victory for AT&T customers. "The company broke its promise to its customers, making them pay millions of dollars more than they should have. Now we can move forward to get people their money back," said Harvey Rosenfield, a lawyer for the non-profit the California-based consumer group.

Key Victory for Cell Phone Users: Nationwide Lawsuit Against Cingular/AT&T for Overcharges and Poor Cell Phone Service May Proceed, Federal Court Rules

Wed, 27 May 2009 10:29:34 PDT

Court Rejects AT&T's Efforts to Bar Customers from Joining Together to Hold the Company Accountable in Court

Santa Monica, CA -- A class action lawsuit charging that millions of cell phone users were misled and overcharged when Cingular merged with AT&T Wireless in 2004 may go forward, a federal court ruled on Tuesday.

Fact Sheet on the Cingular-AT&T Merger Lawsuit

Wed, 27 May 2009 09:24:00 PDT

Who is the lawsuit against? The defendants are Cingular Wireless Corporation, a national cell phone company, and AT&T Wireless Services, a cell phone company that Cingular acquired in a $41 billion deal in October,...

Consumer Watchdog Litigation Team's Summary of Tobacoo II Case Decision

Tue, 19 May 2009 09:50:28 PDT

In a 4-3 decision, the California Supreme Court today reversed a lower court ruling in a false advertising class action pending for more than a decade against the tobacco companies that would have severely restricted consumers’ ability to bring lawsuits under the state’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) to stop businesses unlawful, unfair and fraudulent practices.

New Analysis By Our Legal Team On Tobacco II Case

Mon, 18 May 2009 18:16:00 PDT

The corporate attack on California consumer protection laws suffered a setback today. The California Supreme Court rejected the tobacco industry’s attempt to gut consumers’ ability to bring class actions under one of the...

CA Supreme Court revives class action against tobacco companies

Mon, 18 May 2009 14:32:00 PDT

Here's the latest from the Associated Press about a new California Supreme Court case allowing a false advertising case against the tobacco industry to proceed and clarifying guidelines for future cases. Consumer Watchdog filed a friend of the court brief in the case.

Consumer Class-Action Suits Are On Trial In California

Mon, 18 May 2009 10:30:52 PDT

A far-reaching ruling is expected in a case that could apply limits in 2004's Proposition 64 to ads for cigarettes.

San Francisco, CA -- Consumer class-action lawsuits in California, which have encountered mounting skepticism from courts, face a major test in a tobacco case to be decided Monday by the state Supreme Court. Some advocates say beneficial consumer litigation is getting tossed along with the frivolous. "The big picture is a broad assault on consumer protection laws by the defendants' lobby, with the growing support of the judicial branch," lamented Harvey Rosenfield, attorney for Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group.

State Farm To Cut Car Insurance Rates For Calif.

Thu, 14 May 2009 17:43:13 PDT

Doug Heller, the executive director of Consumer Watchdog, said State Farm proposed last year to lower auto insurance rates by 3.2 percent or about $88 million as required by state law. Heller said his Santa Monica-based group challenged the proposal, arguing the company was relying on one year's worth of data for determining its loss trends, which are used to predict future losses and to set the rate. Heller said insurance providers were previously required to consider three years' worth of data on losses, but Poizner loosened the rule last year.

California Court: Safeco Must Disclose Surcharges

Fri, 08 May 2009 15:28:08 PDT

LOS ANGELES, CA -- A group of California attorneys have won a battle with Safeco Insurance Co. over surcharges the company was charging customers. A state appellate court decision allows policyholders to have their day in court, said Harvey Rosenfield, the author of Proposition 103, which Safeco allegedly violated.

Court: Class Members Must Be Disclosed

Tue, 05 May 2009 13:45:00 PDT

Sued Companies Must Disclose Class Members, Court Says

Now, lawyers suing Safeco can proceed with demands for a list of California residents who were "ripped off by the defendants," said Harvey Rosenfeld, counsel for Santa Monica-based Consumer Watchdog. "After 7 years of winning delays in the court Safeco is out of legal options. I think they are going to have to face the facts and issues refunds for consumers," said Rosenfeld.

Safeco Must Disclose Who It Surcharged for Auto Insurance, Court Rules

Fri, 01 May 2009 13:05:00 PDT

Lawsuit Seeking Refunds for Violations of Proposition 103 Will Proceed

Santa Monica, CA – Safeco Insurance Company will be required to disclose which customers it surcharged due to their lack of prior continuous automobile insurance coverage, the California Court of Appeal in Los Angeles has ruled. Plaintiffs allege that such unapproved and undisclosed surcharges violate Proposition 103, the landmark insurance regulation initiative approved by California voters in 1988.

Consumer Lawyers Fighting Against Legal Tide

Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:00:50 PST

California Supreme Court Will Decide Key Proposition 64 Case on Class Action Consumer Suits
"It's some kind of a twilight zone where insurance gets to live and no one can touch them," said Harvey Rosenfield, founder of the nonprofit advocacy group Consumer Watchdog and the author of the 1988 voter-approved Proposition 103, which cut insurance rates statewide. "It's very disturbing to see what the courts are doing."

Public Interest Groups Ask California Supreme Court to Rehear Case on Consumer Protection Law

Fri, 20 Feb 2009 13:10:00 PST

Groups Want Reversal On Ruling That Companies Can Continue Illegal Practices Until Someone Gets Hurt

Santa Monica, CA -- In an extraordinary request made late yesterday, eight public interest organizations asked the California Supreme Court to scrap its recent decision barring consumers from going to court to block unlawful terms in a contract unless the consumer suffered “some damage.” The groups said the decision of the court leaves businesses unaccountable for clear violations of the law.

Insurance Reformer Harvey Rosenfield Challenges California Commissioner Poizner Over Plan to Deregulate Insurance Rates

Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:11:00 PST

Changes By Poizner Earlier This Year Led to Rate Hikes And New Proposal Will Lead to Even Higher Rates for Individuals, Businesses
San Francisco, CA -- California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner has come under attack from consumer advocates for a proposal to deregulate insurance rates and allow insurance companies to raise rates on homeowners, motorists and business policyholders. The Poizner plan, which faces a public hearing in San Francisco today, would allow insurers to defy important insurance reforms established under Proposition 103 that have saved Californians nearly $600 million on their insurance premiums in 2008 alone.

Explorer Insurance Ordered to Reduce Auto Rates by 15% for California Policyholders

Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:05:57 PST

Santa Monica, CA -- California drivers with Explorer auto insurance coverage will save $8.3 million per year under an order issued this week by Insurance Commissioner Poizner that requires the company to lower its premiums by 15%. The rate decrease must take effect by December 12, 2008.