Fire victims need the best legal help to challenge SDG&E

As anticipated, the SDG&E/Sempra Class Action was denied by a ruling of the San Diego Superior Court on June 22, 2009 [see below].  Concurrent with the ruling to deny class action certification, SDG&E settled with most insurance companies who had subrogated their wildfire losses.  Sempra will most likely pay approximately $900 million of the losses sustained by insurers.

The time has arrived to get off the fence.  If you had a 2007 wildfire loss that has not been paid by your insurer or if you were not insured or underinsured and you have not already done so, you will need to sign with an attorney immediately to protect your rights against SDG&E.

For the last ten months, CARe has anticipated that the class action would be denied and that insurers would prevail in subrogation to recover most of their wildfire losses.  Notably, SDG&E has not admitted liability for causation of the Witch, Rice and Guejito fires in the settlement of the insurers’ claims.

CARe initially supported the class action because it could benefit all fire victims, including those most likely to “fall through the cracks”, and would be the most cost effective resolution of the causation issues.  CARe always asserted fire victims would need individual legal representation to litigate the damages issues after any class action to determine causation.  Once CARe realized the class action was not likely to be certified, we advised fire victims to hire only fully qualified attorneys.  In fact, a prior CARe guest attorney-speaker has consistently opined he did not believe that the SDG&E class action would be certified by the court even though other attorneys were supporting the class action.

We have encouraged fire victims to sign with a competent law firm with:

• Contingency fee retainer with attorney fees based on NET recovery.  If a contingency fee is based on your GROSS recovery, you will always pay more and end up with less money in your pocket.  An attorney with fees on GROSS recovery has no incentive to minimize costs as the attorney receives a percentage of every dollar spent in costs.  CARe’s years of experience have shown the attorney, not the homeowner, may end up with most of any settlement when fees are based on your GROSS recovery.  We recommend contingency fees based on NET recovery.
• Adequate funding, clout and experienced attorneys.  SDG&E has!  SDG&E SDG&E knew it would have a fight on its hands against insurers and homeowners and although it had excellent local representation in Morrison Foerster, it looked beyond San Diego to fortify itself.  SDG&E added the even bigger Los Angeles defense firm, Quinn Emanuel.  Check out www.quinnemanuel.com.  Be sure your attorney has the experience, clout and resources to take on these two law firms.

A few of the Red Flags we have seen in prior disasters are:

• Attorney asks for “upfront” money in exchange for a reduction in fees.  The attorney may be underfunded or may not be confident in your case to use his/her funds.
• Aggressive solicitation.  Many of the best attorneys need no solicitations.  For instance, anyone who needs to wine and dine a potential client may not have a track record and may not be able to attract clients merely through one’s reputation of success.
• Promises the “moon”.  An attorney, who says he/she can get you anything, including emotional distress, pain and suffering and punitive damages, may not be realistic and is making promises to get your business.  A good attorney will provide any potential client realistic expectations based on the law and experience.