Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.

NH Banks and Insurers Keep Unused Credit Life/Credit Disability Premiums

Report Fraud
Case ID: 3575 | Automotive | 07/26/2004

Numerous class actions have been filed against New Hampshire banks and credit insurance companies on behalf of persons who financed vehicles in New Hampshire, purchased credit life or credit disability insurance, and then paid off their loans early between 1999 and the present. The actions allege that the defendants failed to return the unused premiums in violation of New Hampshire insurance law. The actions seek compensatory damages equal to the amounts of the unearned premiums plus interest.

So far, the plaintiffs’ lawyers have settled cases against two banks and filed cases against at least five insurance carriers in state superior courts. They plan to file claims against every credit insurance company doing business in the state. Average claims may range from $100 to $200. As many as 50,000 people may be eligible to take part in the actions.

When people buy cars, the dealership makes its profit not so much by the price of the car itself but by the products that the finance and insurance department can sell to the borrower. Dealers once pushed rust-proofing, fabric protection, and other such accessories. Now, they make a significant portion of their earnings through financing. Credit insurance on those loans has proved to be both popular and profitable, as well. About three-quarters of people who buy a new or used car, truck or SUV, finance it through the dealer, according to F&I Management & Technology Magazine’s June 2, 2004, edition.

Dealers once sold credit insurance with about 90% of all vehicle loans-- Now only about 20% of vehicle loans are insured. The credit insurance covers only the amount of the loan, and remains in effect for the life of the loan, usually five years -- it is supposed to pay off the loan if the buyer dies or becomes disabled during that time. Buyers pay the entire premium in advance, and the cost is folded into the loan. Sometimes, buyers don’t even know they’ve bought the insurance. Because car dealers act as agents in selling the credit insurance, the dealership and insurer generally split the premiums.

The catch is that most people -- about 80% -- pay off their car loans early, often through refinancing. The borrower has paid in advance for coverage for the full term of the loan. Once the loan is paid, the insurance is moot. New Hampshire law requires insurance carriers to refund the balance, called “unearned premiums.” The lawsuits allege that insurance carriers and car dealers, however, have tended not to go out of their way to offer refunds, and most customers don’t think to demand it.

Many people seem not to even remember that they paid for insurance-- Even if they do remember, they are likely to assume the matter will be settled as part of their final balance. Insurance companies would have no way of knowing when a loan is paid off unless someone tells them. Since 1997, however, New Hampshire law has required lenders to notify credit insurance companies when a loan is paid off. Under state law, a bank or lender that fails to notify credit insurers when a loan is paid off can be ordered to repay all finance charges - interest and any other fees - to the borrower.

Credit insurance companies caught holding unearned premiums are required only to pay back the money with interest from the time it was due. The law allows “enhanced” penalties only if a person can prove the failure to refund the money was a deliberate scheme.


At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints.

Other Automotive Cases of Interest

A national class action has been filed in Illinois against the General Motors Corporation and the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. The action is brought on behalf of all U.S. residents who purchased Chevrolet Corvette automobiles manufactured between 1994 and 2004. The Corvette owners claim that the Goodyear tires that came as standard equipment on their automobiles were defective because they allegedly failed at approximately 12,000 miles and were not covered under warranty. The Corvette owners claim that GM and Goodyear's conduct amounts to consumer fraud and fraud by omission and are seeking the replacement cost of the tires as well as damages for inconvenience and injunctive and declaratory relief.
 
Several class actions have been filed against financial services company Washington Mutual, Inc., (NYSE: WM) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between April 15, 2003, and June 28, 2004. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities.
 
Landstar will appeal a U.S. District Court ruling certifying a class action in a lawsuit over Landstar’s owner-operator contracts. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association and four owner-operators have sued Landstar, alleging that the fleet’s contractual agreements with its independent owner-operators do not meet federal disclosure requirements.
 
The parties have reached a settlement apparently valued at $6.5 million in a 38-state action filed against Ford Motor Credit Corporation on behalf of Ford and Lincoln Mercury “Red Carpet” lease customers who allege that the company overcharged them for early lease termination fees between 1991 and 1995. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement should contact the settlement claims administrator for more information.
 
Sometimes, class actions provide the only means of curbing companies' fraudulent behavior in the arena of consumer services. The parties have reached a tentative $7.35 million settlement in a class action against Sears, Roebuck and Company on behalf of all persons throughout the United States who purchased the Sears AccuBalance tire balancing service between May 1, 1989, and June 30, 1994. Proof of claims forms must be postmarked no later than November 1, 2003, to be considered valid.
 
Three lawsuits have been filed in Superior Court by Formula One fans angry over the decision to run the U.S. Grand Prix with only six cars.
 
Become a LawCash Member - FREE!
'Find Money' E-Book
Weekly Email Alerts




privacy policy
YouNewz Beta
IT'S FREE

Report

Report Newz and easily upload your own newzworthy photos from your cell phone or computer to the web.

Share

Quickly share your photos with family, friends, co-workers, or the world with your own Newzpaper.

Read

Instantly find Newz and photos from other YouNewzers and read other YouNewzers Newzpapers.
 
Class Action Lawsuit Center || Product Recall Center || Consumer Complaint Center || About LawCash Link Exchange
Privacy Policy || Legal Policies || Terms & Conditions || Website Advertising Policy || Site Map || Top Lawsuits
LawCash® is a service of nola3, llc
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.

[ Home ]
LawCash
login
Justice is a click away.