Page 1 of 1

Lien Claimant service to DAs (California)

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 11:45 am
by LawAdvocate
So as a person who always serves documents to lien claimants as required - this is a vent and a redundant question - why does the defense community let these lien reps get away with saying "we served it to your client?"

Sorry Charlie, CCR 10770 says you serve it to my client and the defense attorney of records. Time to put an end to this excuse. 10770 clearly states you serve the DA the lien and documents in support of your lien.

Re: Lien Claimant service to DAs (California)

PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 8:05 am
by vampireinthenight
What do you ask as a remedy?

Re: Lien Claimant service to DAs (California)

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2016 1:09 pm
by steve appell
I know my eyesight is poor, but I do not see this requirement in R&R 10770. Can you please clarify?

Re: Lien Claimant service to DAs (California)

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2016 1:31 pm
by jpod
I think he is referring to the item under section (d)(1)(B) although I am not sure I followed the outline tree correctly. The section states:
starting with (d) (1)

...All original and amended lien claims... ...shall be served on:
(B) any employer(s) or insurance carrier(s) that are parties to the case and , if represented their attorney(s) or other agent(s) of record...."

Again I may have gotten the outline tree wrong.

Re: Lien Claimant service to DAs (California)

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2016 1:45 pm
by steve appell
Yes I did see that. I suspect the Lien Reps are saying when the defendant was originally served, there was no DA of record at that time. Therefore, subsequent service on def att is not necessary.... BUT ALAS..... I will wait for LA to confirm.

Re: Lien Claimant service to DAs (California)

PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:15 am
by LawAdvocate
The reg does not say that. Just as Defense is required to serve you as soon as you become known to the, the reverse applies, if never relieves you because you have served my client when I was not a party to not serve me when I become a party. I am winning adverse inferences with disallowances of liens and the lien reps stand there and look at me like they just met a Martian.

My theory remains, if you can't play with the big dogs, get back on the porch.

I answered an email yesterday to yet another lien claimant who didn't want to discuss the facts of the case just walk away with money in the "spirit" of Compromise. I advised him the "spirit" of Compromise is formulated on the fee schedule amount of their bill multiplied by my chances of losing. This lien rep made some of the most intellectually dishonest arguments I have ever seen. So for kicks and giggles I educated him on the law.

What I suggest is that Defendants abide by 10608, because the evidence is what it is. If you owe pay, if you don't say no, stop throwing money at the same group of providers who exhibit bad behavior. Stop rewarding bad behavior, make an offer that reflects the strength of your defense. Then absent evidence that rebuts your defense, drop your offers at every appearance or for every phone call. I have a case with Medical Lien Mgmt where I finally realized they had called me 10 times. I told them I was going to drop my offer by $50 each time. When I get to the lien conference the offer is going to be $1 or withdraw your lien.

Re: Lien Claimant service to DAs (California)

PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2016 7:37 am
by chirple
I agree. We need to stand up to the frivolous collection efforts where the lien claimant is relying on the premise that it is more cost effective for us to settle than repeatedly appear. Drop your offer at each hearing. Reputations spread like wildfire.

If you owe it, pay it, don't litigate. But, if you don't owe, and you have a client who is willing, stand your ground.

If we could only apply CCP998 to workers' compensation lien collection efforts.

Re: Lien Claimant service to DAs (California)

PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2016 8:07 pm
by lacompfun
Maybe tell the lien claimants no service of documents on defense counsel then no settlement. I have tried this on some and they sent me the discovery documents.

My theory is they know it should be sent. They do not as too much work and hope the defense will settle.

Re: Lien Claimant service to DAs (California)

PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:14 pm
by LawAdvocate
My new tactic is to list the issue - LC failure to comply with CCR 10770 (d)(1)(B) and then object to the admissibility of any documents not served to my office prior to or at the lien conference. Working well so far.