You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

16 Responses to “Heath Ledger’s life insurance company dragging its feet over paying claim”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. CB Rawks says:

    That’s disgusting. I hope the result is that the company has so many cancellations that they go belly-up.
    I would certainly cancel a policy with
    them, because they’ve proven they wont actually honour it.

  2. carey says:

    If it is true that Heath answered that he had never done illegal drugs and was not on any medication at the time he signed the insurance contract, then the contract should be null and void.

  3. brianne says:

    this is so sad. I mean, if this is what happens to the high rollers. Imagine the circus that the little guy has to go through that doesn’t have the means to trap them in litigation for years at a time! The evil of insurance companies astounds me! 👿

  4. Kaiser says:

    CB – The Appaloosa trailer ad is making everything run really slowly.

    Re: Heath – So, wait. I thought there were prescription drugs (of some kind) in Heath’s system at the time of death…

    Not that it would make his death any less of an accident. But it sounds like the insurance company is going to drag out a lot of witnesses to Heath’s drug taking. It’s going to be a mess.

  5. Enn says:

    Carey – who’s to say that he was taking the prescriptions when he signed the policy? Also, I thought it was made pretty clear in the ME report that it was an accidental overdose.

  6. clare says:

    Is this insurance company run by the Cult of Scientology? It sounds like the ‘fair game’ sort of thing they would do.
    ETA: To be clear, I’m not saying that Heath was a scientologist – just the people who run the insurance company!

  7. Lola says:

    I hate insurance companies. I don’t know why it still hurts when I read anything about Heath or see his picture or his daughter. I am a huge fan of his and I just loved the guy. He had great chemistry with Michelle too. Look at them, they were so perfect together. Why oh why do these things happen?

  8. daisy424 says:

    Fat cat insurance company pricks, rot in hell.

  9. Carena says:

    The only difference here is that they can afford good lawyers so they will get their money.

    These insurance companies pull this all the time with “normal people” who can’t afford to be in court a year or more. They hope you drop the claim rather than fight it out for such a long time.

    If the examiner said accident, it is an accident and they should pay. Period.

  10. Jo says:

    You show me how many people with Insurance policies that AREN’T on meds of some kind. These days mostly Anti -Depressants. It’s known he was doing well, just had trouble sleeping. He wasn’t an abuser of drugs. The coroner stated accidental death. They are just dragging their feet. But, that what they do. 😈

  11. Bodhi says:

    What a bunch of BS. The company isn’t doing itself any favors by dragging this out. They will have to pay something eventually

  12. Liana says:

    Although my legal knowledge is not specifically in estates per se, or even specifically US law (I’m Australian), the insurers may have a leg to stand on under the “material misrepresentation” claim (although not likely the “suicide” claim, as the death was ruled ‘accidental’.)

    If he lied about his prescription drug use (and on the balance of probabilities this is fairly likely, since this representation was made 6 months before he died of a prescription drug overdose…) then denying the extent of his prescription drug use is probably a material misrepresentation, seeing as it was that very behaviour that led to his death. The insurers would have had a right to know about his drug use, seeing as it was so severe that it ended up causing his death.

    In the alternative, and he wasn’t on any drugs at the time he took the policy out (remembering that it was only 6 months before he died), I would guarantee that his policy contract included an ongoing disclosure clause, requiring him to tell the insurers if any of his circumstances change at all. We’re talking about a $10 million dollar contract here; there’s no way the insurers would leave themselves unprotected in any way at all.

    I’m not defending the actions of the insurers, and I am aware that these tactics are employed against many, many claimants, but the whole issue ought to highlight to people just how important it is to be frankly honest when taking out these policies, even when telling a small lie could reduce your premium. Never give them a leg to stand on when they inevitably take you to court.

  13. Bob Jim says:

    really interesting post cheers

  14. Nick P says:

    As a Georgia insurance agent specializing in life and health insurance, I can say that this one’s standard operating procedure. Anytime an insured dies of non-natural causes on a claim this large, the insurance company performs an investigation. 99 times out of a hundred, the claim is paid just fine – I think this one’s been blown out of proportion by folks who just don’t particularly care for insurance companies.

  15. Andrew says:

    Sad story. The insurance company will do the utmost not to pay money. It any more the first similar case. And trial in court can be tightened for very long time.
    The insurance company can be understood (but not to justify). If to pay to everyone on $10 mil it is possible to become the bankrupt quickly.

  16. John says:

    This is actually horrific. This whole process seems way to dragged out. It appears that insurance companies will do anything in their power to avoid paying up and actually “insuring” people.