Complaint Review: State Farm Insurance Co - Bloomington Illinois

1.  There is a function on ROR called "search latest reports."  That's how I came to read this ROR (and your ROR as well.)

2.  Read the above rebuttals - there is a Robert in Irving CA.

So, have you sued the person who hit you yet?  If not, why not?  You have that right-to have your day in court.

Susan:  When an insurance company is liable for 10s of thousands of dollars they never pay up front but make you sue them.  They figure they want the interest.  They probably also figure a certain percentage will never sue.  Maybe their lawyers are on a salary.  If they owe you tens of thousands the situation is standard procedure. They will probably pay on the day of trial.

Robert:  If you are not the same Robert how did you so quickly see this report?  Again you forget to mention 9 pieces of physical evidence that support my version.  The police report relates to the fact that the other drivers father was called to the scene and was a cop.  Physical evidence does not lie but many people do.  Geico was well aware of the situation.  I did not change anything.  I inched ahead and when he appeared I stopped.  I never got into the intersection.

First; I'm not the Robert who rebutted this report.

2nd; In your ROR I didn't come down on you.  I explained to you why your claim was denied.  The police report is what did you in.  That, and an outside witness.  Further, your story changed from not moving to "creeping at 4 mpg."  The police state you ran the stop sign and the outside witness stated your vehicle was moving in an irratic manner.  These statements in the report did you in.  As I explained to you, in your accident it doesn't matter who hit who.  You had a stop sign and the other party had the right of way.  You are not to enter the intersection unless you can safely clear the intersection.  You seem too focused on your perceived "I was hit."  It doesn't matter.

Further, I told you that you still have recourse:

"If you are so adament in your position, you have recourse.  SUE the person who was driving the car the "hit you" or sue the owner of the car that "hit you."

You are entitled to your day in court-go file a lawsuit now.  It doesn't matter what GEICO says, you can still SUE the other party for your damages.

Keep this in mind; in most jurisdictions at an intersection with a stop sign you are required to stop before the sign.  More importantly, you are not to proceed and enter the intersection UNLESS you can safely clear the intersection.  In other words, even if you were stopped (not creeping at 4 mph as you wrote) you still are the cause of the accident because you had pulled out in front of on-coming traffic that had the right-of-way.  Don't take my word for it, go file your lawsuit Monday."

Please tell us, have you filed your lawsuit against the person who hit you?  I understand that where you had your accident is a "blind" corner thanks to the building on the corner.  Perhaps you could sue the municipality as contributing to the accident for it's FAILURE to install a MIRROR at that intersection so that folks as you can view to the right to check traffic WITHOUT ENTERING the intersection.

My medicals were just about $15,000, so you can see why an offer of $8,000 for 13 months of pain was such a slap in the face.  I'm sorry to hear you had similar problems when reporting an incident with Geico; some people have nothing better to do with their time than to BE the devil's advocate!  

    In my court case experience pain and suffering is usually 3-10 times your medical bills depending on how serious the injuries are.  Do you state the amount of your bills?  In complaint 468975 I have a blatant act by Geico and Robert from Buffalo came down on me there too.  ???

When I said Snake Farm isn't even offering me 1% now I meant exactly that:  Snake Farm has withdrawn its previous offer, unless you count the threat that if I simply walk away and drop the suit altogether, they won't come after me for attorney's fees.

First the OP Stated...

As a mother and a homemaker, my economic value for 13 months is approximately $32,500. How much a jury places on 3-4 migraines a week (one which lasted a full month), the inability to drive a car or even hold a plate in my right hand without intense pain, and a total lack of enjoyment of life for over a year is anyone's guess, but I'm sure I would have happily settled for what Snake Farm is dishing out for video taped depositions of a dozen people (many of whom have absolutely no knowledge of this accident or my health since), having those tapes transcribed, paying their shyster lawyers $45,000-$50,000 to litigate, and all the fees each side will be charged for expert witnesses."

.. Then the OP later stated

Today, Snake Farm isn't even offering to make me 1% whole for the 13 months of life that was stolen from me.

Okay re-reading this taking the intial(and without anything to the contrary the current offer) of $8,000 if that is not even 1%, we are figuring that she is going for at least $800,000.  Is that the 4.5 Million implied..no, but it is still a very heafty sum.  Especially when the OP said they would have been happy with the $45,000-$50,000.

But the rest stands.  NO insurance company is going to just hand over that much money for INDIRECT damages.  People can claim that it's unfair, and the companies should just "pay up".  But that is not the way it works.  Yes this could involve court, judges, attornies, and possibly juries.  Hopefully she will never be in this situation again, but I don't think her experience would be any different with any other company.

In my last response to Robert, I stated that in the OP's report, it does not mention a specific amount more or less then what they paid the lawyers, and regarding what the poster stated she would be happy with. I caught this after I posted my last response and since I can not alter or edit it, this revision should suffice.

In one of the replies the OP states...

"As a mother and a homemaker, my economic value for 13 months is approximately $32,500.  How much a jury places on 3-4 migraines a week (one which lasted a full month), the inability to drive a car or even hold a plate in my right hand without intense pain, and a total lack of enjoyment of life for over a year is anyone's guess, but I'm sure I would have happily settled for what Snake Farm is dishing out for video taped depositions of a dozen people (many of whom have absolutely no knowledge of this accident or my health since), having those tapes transcribed, paying their shyster lawyers $45,000-$50,000 to litigate, and all the fees each side will be charged for expert witnesses."

So we actually do have some idea of what the OP feels she should receive for compensation, which is certainly not millions as some are implying. These seem like reasonable amounts to me for what she has endured by no fault of her own and the negligence of another, assuming they are truthful and documented, which the poster states they are.

Now perhaps by focusing on the FACTS, and not just accusations, innuendo and presumptions, we can figure this out. There are valid points starting to be made on both sides.

However Robert still seems to be implying that this poster is expecting millions and I can not see where this is fact. Sure this poster is upset and now even angry due to previous provocation, so perhaps things are getting blown out of proportion, which is always to be expected when one is provoked. However whether this poster expects 5 digits or 6 digits can not be determined by us. And we are not the ones who are suffering from this accident so how can we determine what this poster should be offered?

As Robert stated...

"Your claim here is that they did not make you "whole".  Per the policy(contract) they did by paying all of your DIRECT losses.  Again by your own words "quickly and without complaint" so there is no debate or argument there.  This actually appears to be a plus on how they handle claims."

No one was "debating" regarding the direct losses..did you not read the report? I will quote..."I was offered a paltry $8000 for pain and suffering." If the pain and suffering is due to this claim, and they did not offer near enough, that would mean she was not made "whole" again, and that there is a hole in your response.

"Back to the Pain and Suffering.  While no one here has your policy in hand, I can just about guarantee you that there is no formula or calculation for any "pain and suffering" in your policy.  Thus making any "breach of contract" basically a mute point.  It comes down to what you "feel" you "deserve".

Regardless, this is not up for debate or to be decided by you or I or anyone here who responds other then those directly involved. I personally find no reason to doubt an $8000.00 offer may possibly not be enough compensation, and I certainly can not argue either way without more specifics. I can only go by what the report states, which is that it is worth a lot more, and State Farm is fully aware of this.

"But in all of this has your "pain and suffering" increased?  Because in an earlier post you seem to indicate that you would have been happy with the 45-50K they were paying the lawyers, but now that is not 1% of what it would take to make you "whole".  So is your "pain and suffering" so bad now that you want 4.5-5 Million?  Because if that is the case you can be very sure that no matter what insurance company you are with they would definatly be fighting it as well.  No company is just going to "roll over" and give someone a 6 or 7 figure "pain and suffering" settlement, and yes that may mean a few years of court.  If there is an insurance company that did "roll over", they wouldn't be around very long.  Esepcially once less than honest people realized this and started making very outragous claims."

Why is the pain and suffering in the first sentence in quotes? Are you questioning this poster or implying something? Bank defender tactics again? You just can't stop, can you.

Now for the corrections. I never found ANY indication whatsoever that she would have been happy with 45-50K or any specific amount smaller or larger. She states they did not offer her a "decent" amount for 13 months of pain and suffering, and I quote..."Much, much better to pay a rude, crude, hateful, bitchy attorney somewhere in the neighborhood of $45,000 plus another $10,000 or so in expenses to fight it in court". Where does it mention "happy with" any specific amount? Why bring up points if you have to twist statements around and word play to make them?  Just the facts Jack.

As far as the 1% thing...and I quote..."Today, Snake Farm isn't even offering to make me 1% whole for the 13 months of life that was stolen from me."

She is saying here that the Insurance Company isn't even OFFERING to make her 1% whole, not that any amount she was paid or offered is 1% of what she expects. Why do you need to make points using examples that are so easy to debunk? It takes away credibility and although you and I have our share of disagreements, I know you are better then that Robert.

"Also, I am just using your words and statements.  The same thing any lawyer(which I am not) would do.  So if you are in the middle of any litigation you may want to consult with your laywer as to if it is in the best interest for you to continue posting. "

I agree that you are "using" her words and statements, and like a Lawyer are using them in any context or arrangement you please in order to make YOUR point. But this poster is NOT on trial, and as you stated you are not a Lawyer..so what do you have to gain by giving the poster the 3rd degree? Just the facts Jack, wordplay not necessary here. The poster is not the one who will be the defendant if she ends up suing so nothing can be used against her that she states here. If there is a counter suit and by a one in a billion chance they tried to use any testimony from this thread, it would at worst give the jury a chuckle and you know it Robert. She has said nothing I can find that would be incriminating against herself in this report that would hold up in a legitimate court of law, they would seek out....the facts. And then use those facts to determine how much, if anything, she will get in compensation for the pain and suffering.

The example you gave with the car is not the same.  That IS a simple case of contract law.  You give an example of a contract and it was not fullfilled.  So yes you better be "crying foul".  "Pain and Suffering" is not contract law, that is unless your policy specificially had guidelines as to how much you are entitled to.  If it did have such specific provisions then yes they need to pay on them based on the "contract". 

Your claim here is that they did not make you "whole".  Per the policy(contract) they did by paying all of your DIRECT losses.  Again by your own words "quickly and without complaint" so there is no debate or argument there.  This actually appears to be a plus on how they handle claims.

Back to the Pain and Suffering.  While no one here has your policy in hand, I can just about guarantee you that there is no formula or calculation for any "pain and suffering" in your policy.  Thus making any "breach of contract" basically a mute point.  It comes down to what you "feel" you "deserve". 

But in all of this has your "pain and suffering" increased?  Because in an earlier post you seem to indicate that you would have been happy with the 45-50K they were paying the lawyers, but now that is not 1% of what it would take to make you "whole".  So is your "pain and suffering" so bad now that you want 4.5-5 Million?  Because if that is the case you can be very sure that no matter what insurance company you are with they would definatly be fighting it as well.  No company is just going to "roll over" and give someone a 6 or 7 figure "pain and suffering" settlement, and yes that may mean a few years of court.  If there is an insurance company that did "roll over", they wouldn't be around very long.  Esepcially once less than honest people realized this and started making very outragous claims.

Also, I am just using your words and statements.  The same thing any lawyer(which I am not) would do.  So if you are in the middle of any litigation you may want to consult with your laywer as to if it is in the best interest for you to continue posting. 

To the OP: you stated you were agony for 13 months. I don't doubt you. But I'm curious as to the timing. Assuming your pain occured in the months immediately following the accident, the $8000 seems reasonable. I'm assuming (although I admit I don't know for a fact) that the claim was initially settled rather quickly. So they had no way of knowing your pain would continue as long as it did. If the 13 months are now over, why are you suing? For the pain and suffering you experienced in the past? Somehow I don't think that will get you far. It's over and done with. Maybe you just need to accept the fact you got some renumeration and let it go.

Why is the lawyer putting you through "hell and back"? I'm ssuming you had to provide records and give a depositon. What else is involved? (just curious)

Life is too short to carry a grudge. Change to another insurance company and be happy you're alive.

I came to this site wanting to warn people of Snake Farm's reprehensible practices, and instead I get treated like a money grubbing whiner, demanding someone pay me $3 million for stepping on my toe!  I wonder what all of you would do if you went down to your local Mercedes Benz dealership and plopped down $500,000 to order a 2011 SLR McLaren.  Five months later, you get the call you've been waiting for that the car you'd ordered (fire-engine red exterior, slate gray interior, fully loaded), had finally arrived.  You jump in your car and hurry down to the dealership only to have them hand you the keys to a basic white-on-white C-class.  You, of course, hand back the keys and remind them that YOU are the customer who paid half a million dollars for a McLaren, and their response is:  "But this paperwork we have just says something about, well, I can read a C, and something about $5xxx down, and that it's supposed to be a 2011.  Hey, this C is a 2011, exactly what you wanted, exactly what you paid for, and exactly what you're going to get."  You won't take the C-class, they won't give you back your $500,000 even when you show them the VERY LEGIBLE receipt you have in your possession, so what do you do?

Why was the poster slandered, insulted, provoked and falsely accused with hostility by those that have nothing to do with the case, and have no way to reasonably place a value on the OPs suffering?

I agree the poster did not have to mention the Mercedes, however it is clearly evident this poster was provoked and taunted, which is what a handful of bad people that respond to those that complain here typically do.

Now to the part of your response that was warranted regarding the coverage of the person that hit them, and their own insurance. The OP stated it was a company vehicle and they have full coverage.

And the fact that some states may not have p&s as part of the package, is not going to make this poster happy if her state has it if they don't offer near enough when it is needed. If it happened to you, would you expect to be compensated, or just let the insurance company slide with no complaint?

Lets Start with Robert from Irvine. I expected he would jump on this..even though no where in my reply did I mention him. I guess he knows he is a creep.

In Roberts original post...he states..

What do you consider if fair compensation?

Subjective in nature. The point of the complaint is that whatever compensation was paid, was not enough.

where they will most certainly LOSE since they've already admitted fault by paying my damages and medicals.

- They paid for your damages and medical quickly and without a problem.  But that really is not related to "pain and suffering".  They could admit fault but if you want 30.9 Billion dollars(for example) for "pain and suffering"..that is not going to happen.

Is this poster expecting 30.9 billion dollars? Where in the post did they ask for that much? The ignorance you use here for example is to imply this poster is being unreasonable, or ridiculous etc..typical tactic by the biased trolls.

Perhaps the poster was mistaking to imply they would "certainly" win just because the insurance company paid out other expenses. I believe the poster stated that to imply that there certainly was damages and ruled in their favor. But regardless, what I posted stands TRUE. That it is not up to anyone who replies here how much compensation this poster should receive for pain and suffering. It is between State Farm and the Poster, and /or a Court. And if this Poster did not receive enough, or received nothing and did have pain and suffering, anyone reasonable would consider that QUITE complaint worthy, and a rip off.

But if you think you will prevail in any suit, why not sue them for what you think you deserve.  There are a ton of Personal Injury attornies who would take your case in a second on contingency(you don't pay up front) if they think you have any case at all.

This is true. However the meat of this complaint is the point that State Farm did not offer anywhere NEAR the appropriate compensation after this person spent 13 months in agony. Why would anyone but the Insurance Company or someone personally involved with the case come to this thread to rebut that?? Unless of course they were simply an arrogent, heartless, presumptuous troll.

Debunked.

The next reply after Roberts was from a poster named Russ who titles the reply "You were not ripped off". Then he goes on to state that because the OP did not state the nature of the injuries etc, there is no way to determine if $8000 was paltry or not.

How does any of that prove in any way this customer was compensated justly? There is no grounds here to state "You were not ripped off". If anyone responding does not know enough info and wishes to rebut, it would be reasonable to ask some questions perhaps..but to presumptuously state someone was not ripped off and then can not back that statement up with a single fact...is debunked by default.

Next...

Ramjet the next bank defender who also came here to slander posters for no reason..titles the response similarly ignorant..."No, you were NOT ripped off".

"Pain and suffering is a rip off for all of us.  You said you are/were in pain.  Giving you more money will not change that."

Do I even need to reply to that statement?

"You are just looking for easy money, one of the major problems with this country."

What on Earth makes you think this is easy money? While I do agree too many in this country are greedy and pull scams, the major problems with this country which most would agree is the economy currently, was brought on by corporate greed and real estate investors, not people who were seriously injured in car accidents and expect some compensation for pain and suffering.

Regardless, entire response debunked by default. You can not state someone was not ripped off without any evidence and be taken seriously. You can question it certainly, but stating something as fact, without facts is a fail on every level.

Robert from Buffalo next....

"It will get you no where. These Scrooges are beyond reason, compassion or fairness. Let me go back and forth with them if they want to play, I enjoy humiliating them until they stop the nonsense and hostility against people who come here to lodge complaints. Although the intent of this site is for consumers, by consumers to lodge complaints, these trolls do not get it,"

"If this doesn't convince the others to your hipocracy I don't know what will".

Convince what others? All you bank defenders are the same, you can not be convinced of anything, even using reason and logic. What does hypocrisy have to do with it?

"You were amusing when you first came on ROR many months ago, but I quickly identified you as a troll-although you like to call others that.  Let's recap your true colors:

You are a hipocrite.

You are a mean person who posts on ROR looking for a fight.

You have not debunked anyone.  Just the opposite. I and others have highlighted youR nonsense, double standards, misinformation, and hipocracy.

You have not debunked anyone."

Glad you found me amusing. Now I can understand why you would think I am a mean person because there have been times I have been mean. But I do not come here to insult, attack and belittle posters who lodge legitimate complaints. All you bank defenders seem to have some unfounded passion to defend large corporations against the average consumer who feels they were overcharged, or in this case under compensated. It is their right to report it here. It is your right to dispute it as well...but once falsehoods, opinion and fact-less statements are used, the truth is twisted, comments are stated as fact and not backed up, hostile and belittling behavior towards those that post here in good faith..I post here to point that out, and generally back it up with fact. How is this ANYTHING like what you defenders of large corporations do?

And to prove my point even more..you state I have not debunked anyone. Whatever you and others think you highlighted, I have debunked. If I ever misquoted a fact I would have admitted it, not fight it or continue to show ignorance as the defenders do. I have debunked many of you consistently and quite effortlessly. Regardless of how you feel about that is irrelevant as just about everything I accuse you and others of...is clearly self evident to anyone with average perception and comprehension skills.

If what I am doing which is showing compassion to people who lodge complaints, and putting bad people in their place for treating others with complete disregard and disrespect is considered a troll, I can live with that. But the actual definition of what an internet troll is, albeit a slang term, can be found easily, and certainly it describes what you defenders do to the letter.


Now does anyone else still wish to go back and forth redundantly with me? I would prefer not so the focus could be on the consumers complaint and possible rebuttal from the insurance company, but if I can take some burden off the OP, I have no problem continuing the debunkage. If anyone has any actual facts that PROVES this person was or was not compensated enough, it would be some help. Otherwise keep your opinions to yourself. This site is for complaints by consumers, not an opinion poll.

Do we really have to know you have Mercedes AMG's? I drive a Honda Civic and I carry the highest insurance offered. Perhaps that is the problem though, whoever hit you may have only have the minimum required by your state. As for pain and suffering be happy you have it, some states do not even allow p&s as part of the insurance package.

"It will get you no where. These Scrooges are beyond reason, compassion or fairness. Let me go back and forth with them if they want to play, I enjoy humiliating them until they stop the nonsense and hostility against people who come here to lodge complaints. Although the intent of this site is for consumers, by consumers to lodge complaints, these trolls do not get it,"

If this doesn't convince the others to your hipocracy I don't know what will.

You were amusing when you first came on ROR many months ago, but I quickly identified you as a troll-although you like to call others that.  Let's recap your true colors:

You are a hipocrite.

You are a mean person who posts on ROR looking for a fight.

You have not debunked anyone.  Just the opposite. I and others have highlighted youR nonsense, double standards, misinformation, and hipocracy.

You have not debunked anyone.

You are the same as the other fools who posts here looking for attention, the Mighty Charles from phenix city and the idiot Karl with his tinfoil hat, except that YOU can at least WRITE in a comprehensive manner.  As such, you POLUTE this site-a site that actually performs a good and needed service for many folks.

Perhaps now folks here WILL IGNORE you so you'll have to go elsewhere to get the attention you seem to crave-I know I will.

STOP FEEDING THIS TROLL.

Thanks Ronny for once again proving my point.

The OP claimed that because they already paid the medical and vehicle losses that they had admited guilt, so to paraphrase that the pain and suffering is a "slam-dunk".  But as I pointed out, and your dilgent posting of the definition stated,they are totally independent.

Interesting how you suggested that they sue(in a round about way), which again was the exact same thing I suggested if they felt that they had a case.  Although it wasn't 100% clear in the OP if they had sued or were going to sue.  It turns out she is in the middle of litigation.  Which on a side note would make posting here not really the wisest thing to do. 

But then after this we go back to the way that Ronny thinks the world "should" work. 

At the same time, insurance claims should be paid out to cover loss, and compensating for pain and suffering is certainly part of what a motor vehicle insurance policy should cover.

- Yes people "should" do a lot of things.  The insurance company "should" pay for damages to cover the losses.  Oh wait they did..the OP stated they did without a problem.  But that they also "should" pay for pain and suffering.  Well you just answered it why they might not.  Fraud and people getting "over compensated". 

There is no formula for Pain and Suffering.  If she was really only hoping for 32K, admitidly that does not sound like much.  Unfortunatly when she used the "it will cost them more to litigate it", that goes right back to why she probably is having a hard time.  There was a time when insurance companies did think that way, hence the huge amount of fraud that developed.  Well unfortunatly because of those people, insurance companies have drawn a "line in the sand".

So if the OP switches insurance companies, don't expect the next one to be any different.  In fact if you read some of those reports you would have been lucky to even get your direct losses paid without a fight.

It will get you no where. These Scrooges are beyond reason, compassion or fairness. Let me go back and forth with them if they want to play, I enjoy humiliating them until they stop the nonsense and hostility against people who come here to lodge complaints. Although the intent of this site is for consumers, by consumers to lodge complaints, these trolls do not get it, they do not like that people should complain here..read the first few lines on the homepage of this site if unaware of it's intent, and by and whom it is for. I have nothing against a little ridicule if the complaint is ridiculous, but yours appears to be legitimate. Regardless, that is not for any of our "opinions" to decide as it is well within all and any reason and logic to believe you were hit and suffered because of it.

Now some of the same "trolls" I see here replying to your report, do it to others as well on other reports. And they personally attack me as well. They will even call me a troll at times. But part of the definition of a troll is one who posts to create controversy. I do not feel I create controversy, but more then try to end it, expose the truth, and show some compassion to those that report here in good faith. And that there are some reading these that are not going to be hostile and belittle others for lodging legitimate reports here.

As far as your case, that is between you and State Farm. You lodged a complaint here which is good because it can forewarn others of how State Farm is conducting business in your case..and as well to be fair to State Farm as they will have opportunity to respond, rebut and/or make good. I await their response with much anticipation. However, since this is going to litigation they may not be able to discuss it now, or, they simply will choose not to respond here, ever.

But complaints are good. Because complaints lead to exposure, bad press and sometimes even law changes. Yes, exposing how these businesses are treating people, can help to make things right which is a major benefit this free site can provide to consumers.

No one replying here has the right or insight to tell you what YOUR or anyone's pain and suffering is worth.  Or what financial losses you have incurred due to your injuries. That is up to the court/jury to decide, or what you accept as a settlement. In any legal dictionary you were to read..the definition would be similar...ie: "Although the physical or emotional distress resulting from an injury is somewhat abstract and subjective, the injured person can seek compensation.  How much is awarded for pain and suffering is calculated separately from the amount awarded for more direct expenses, such as medical bills or time lost from work... although sometimes these amounts are considered to arrive at a logical figure."

It is a well known fact that insurance companies in general try not to pay out, or pay out as least as possible until sued or settled, no news there. However, they just raise rates if they pay out fair amounts. Do some people get overcompensated? Absolutely. Do some people abuse a situation and claim whiplash and then get caught lifting boulders and playing ice hockey? Sure it happens. But it does not mean every victim of an accident is scamming, and many do not collect near enough to cover the total damages and long term consequences.

Do you think any of the CEO's of these companies are over compensated? I say most likely but what they get paid is their business  At the same time, insurance claims should be paid out to cover loss, and compensating for pain and suffering is certainly part of what a motor vehicle insurance policy should cover. Or, it goes to court. That is the way it is done, period.

I wonder if anyone has looked up the stats to see what State Farm insurance company earns every year. I bet it is staggering. Oh wait, I'll look it up and post it for us.

Let me steal 13 months of your life (especially with young children you waited 40 years for) and then you tell me that 13 months was worth absolutely nothing.  I'm guessing you have an IQ of about 85 and have been un- or under-employed all your adult life.  Right about now, you're wishing you had a reason to sue someone, even if you had to live through a hell caused by a negligent driver, just so you could make some "fast" cash.  Your green eyes are glowing so brightly, I'd be able to see them from the opposite end of Las Vegas Blvd. at night, if I was stupid enough to be in Las Vegas right now.  You obviously have nothing better to do with your time than find people to criticize for one reason or another.  I'd pity you, but you don't deserve it.  In fact, I hope like hell you're insured by Snake Farm (if, in fact, you can afford to be insured by anybody), so they can screw you to the wall someday too.

Pain and suffering is a rip off for all of us.  You said you are/were in pain.  Giving you more money will not change that.

You are just looking for easy money, one of the major problems with this country. 

The insurance company met their obligation and giving you more money for some nebulous concept like "Pain and Suffering" is absolutely ridiculous, you should be ashamed of yourself although I'm certain you don't have enough integrity to understand.

Ridiculous!

My Mercedes Benz ML-55 AMG (as well as our other 2 AMGs) are covered well beyond what is required by law.  I don't owe you any explanation of my medical injuries -- Snake Farm knows them in great detail, since they've subpoenaed records of my medical care for the past 10 years.  Snake Farm was the insurer for the party who rear-ended me, and since he was driving a "company" truck, they were fully insured as well.  You may think that pain and suffering is a sissy complaint, but I dare you to live through what I did for 13 months, then have your own insurance company devalue the life that another of their insureds stole from you because he couldn't be bothered to pay attention to what he was doing behind the wheel.  Add to all this the fact that Snake Farm has managed to drag me through hell while attempting to make them accountable for almost 3 years now, and I have MOST DEFINITELY been RIPPED OFF!

State Farm paid your medical bills and your property damage. Since you did not detail the nature of the injuries, there is no way to determine if $8000.00 was "paltry" or not. You also did not mention whether the adverse had Bodily Injury protection and what the policy limits were. You also did not mention if you have uninsured or under insured motorist protection. Therefore, your assertions that you were ripped off are not well founded.

I've already filed suit (as stated in my complaint).  As a mother and a homemaker, my economic value for 13 months is approximately $32,500.  How much a jury places on 3-4 migraines a week (one which lasted a full month), the inability to drive a car or even hold a plate in my right hand without intense pain, and a total lack of enjoyment of life for over a year is anyone's guess, but I'm sure I would have happily settled for what Snake Farm is dishing out for video taped depositions of a dozen people (many of whom have absolutely no knowledge of this accident or my health since), having those tapes transcribed, paying their shyster lawyers $45,000-$50,000 to litigate, and all the fees each side will be charged for expert witnesses.  My husband and I have probably paid them 2-3x that much in the 20+ years we were insured by them.  From now on, another insurance company will be receiving our premiums.

What do you consider if fair compensation?

where they will most certainly LOSE since they've already admitted fault by paying my damages and medicals.

- They paid for your damages and medical quickly and without a problem.  But that really is not related to "pain and suffering".  They could admit fault but if you want 30.9 Billion dollars(for example) for "pain and suffering"..that is not going to happen.

But if you think you will prevail in any suit, why not sue them for what you think you deserve.  There are a ton of Personal Injury attornies who would take your case in a second on contingency(you don't pay up front) if they think you have any case at all.