Insurance Claims

[Pugs423]

Kind of new to this but need a liitle help!!!
My truck was vandilized and burned,  now my Insurance Company has asked me to take a Poly test,  but I really do not trust the tests.
Do i have a n option to deny the test, or will they with hold the payment for my truck.
By th eway I'm in Tennessee and the INs Company is Allstate.
PLease someone give me som advice,  thanks

[Twoblock]

You cannot be required to take a polygraph and if you are sanctioned for your refusal, the insurance compay is wide open for a hefty lawsuit. I'm not a lawyer but i'm pretty sure that;s right. it would be smart to check with a lawyer on this.

[George W. Maschke]

Pugs423,

You're right not to trust the polygraph "test": polygraphy has no scientific basis and is inherently biased against the truthful. I very much doubt that Allstate can legally compel you to submit to this fraudulent procedure. Is any mention of a polygraph requirement made in your insurance policy? (I found no mention of polygraphs on Allstate's website.)

[Pugs423]

The only thing i could find in my policy declration info was to "submit a statement under oath"  i didn't know if that included a polygraph.  But i also just found outthat there sending a private investigator somtime in the next couple of days, and he may ask me to tak one.  That may be because the City investigator were i live accused me of it and i told him were he ould stick it and walked out of the room.  I don't know if that was a good thing to do or not,  but i had already gave him all the info i could give him anyway.     Thank you guys for responding so fast  this is the first time i have used somthing like this.   If there is anymore advice or someone else who has delt with a simular situation i would greatly apperciate all the help i can get.

[George W. Maschke]

Submitting a statement under oath is not the same thing as submitting to a lie detector test. If a polygraph requirement is not stipulated in your policy, I don't see how Allstate can legally modify that contract by demanding that you submit to a polygraph "test" before it will make payment for your loss.

It is worth bearing in mind that Allstate's private investigator will have one mission: to find a reason -- any reason -- to deny your claim and save the company money. As Twoblock mentioned, I think it would be smart to check with a lawyer regarding this situation.

[Ed Earl]

The one thing some of the previous posters have correct, is their conclusion that you cannot be forced to take a polygraph examination. Most statutes prevent compelling polygraph and the process requires cooperation.

Regardless of opinions you will find here against polygraph and rhetoric it generates, peer reviewed published polygraph research as well as the vast majority of anecdotal information from actual cases prove repeatedly that a polygraph examination can effectively discriminate lying from truth-telling. Every year more and more courts at federal and state level are accepting polygraph results as evidence.

Broad claims like "no scientific basis" and "inherently biased against the truthful" are mere opinions.

You are certainly better off refusing the examination than trying to use the countermeasures available on this site. There is at least one study that indicates that attempting countermeasures actually increses the possibility of a truthful person failing the examination and there is no peer-reviewed published research that proves countermeasures taught in The Lie Beind the Lie Detector can be effectively implemented in a real life polygraph.

Do all of the research you want. Listen to the advice and negative claims about polygraph you'll find here. Read the book if you want. Read the massive barrage of responses that will likely follow my post. It's a free world. I am here fighting against those who try to convince people they are better off lying and cheating than they are telling the truth.

If you don't want to take the test, refuse it, try to "beat it" at your peril. If you try countermeasures and get caught or try them and fail your test, both of which, in my opinion, are vastly more probable than successfully using countermeasures, you should not expect a sympathetic ear when you try to use excuse your behavior.

It's your decision.

[George W. Maschke]

Pugs423,

Note that our friend "Ed Earl" derives income from giving polygraph tests. You should greet his claims regarding polygraphy with the same skepticism that you would those of a tobacco salesman touting the health benefits of smoking.

[Ed Earl]

See pugs I told you.

All I did was encourage you to refuse the test,(agreeing with him on that point by the way) suggest that you should do your own research ( a sound idea concerning any important matter)  and point out an alternative position (allowed and encouraged in this forum) to the overwhelming negative views represented on this site. He responds impuning my integrity, comparing me to a tobacco salesman making some type of false claim. A statement I find at odds with his demand that posts substantively, civilly, and non-argumentatively address the original topic, made yesterday in another thread on this very site.

While he may disagree with my statements, they are accurate.

As a direct response to his ad hominum attack impugning my personal integrity, I feel justified informing you that the origin of our friend "George Mashke's" hatred of polygraph is derived from his demonstrated inability to pass them.  You will find support for this comment in his own words at: https://antipolygraph.org/statements/statement-003.shtml    I encourage you to read it for yourself and draw your own conclusion, but you may have to process a certain amount of "spin".

I believe you should  greet his claims regarding polygraphy with the same skepticism that you would the instruction of a Drivers Ed teacher who has repeatedly been denied his license to drive.

I am STILL here fighting against those who try to convince people they are better off lying and cheating than they are telling the truth. My personal opinion is that the free advice you might find here on countermeasures is tremendously overpriced. I don't really understand why encouraging people to be honest, honorable and truthful meets with such resistance here.

[Hunter]

Refuse the examination.  It cannot be compelled by the insurance company.  It may delay your claim, however, it is not a condition of your insurance policy.  You are not an employee, so EPPA does not apply.  It appears you do not want to go though an examination, so just refuse.  All the parsing of words regarding your situation are irrelevant.  It is your choice.  I also derive my income from conducting polygraph examinations so I guess my opinion is also covered by the one statement "You should greet his claims regarding polygraphy with the same skepticism that you would those of a tobacco salesman touting the health benefits of smoking."

[Sergeant1107]

As a direct response to his ad hominum attack impugning my personal integrity, I feel justified informing you that the origin of our friend "George Mashke's" hatred of polygraph is derived from his demonstrated inability to pass them.

It would be more accurate to write that George's negative opinion of polygraphs was derived from his inability to pass one by answering the questions truthfully.

I think it is reasonable to believe that most intelligent people would have serious misgivings about the polygraph if they were accused of lying after answering all the questions truthfully.

[Pugs423]

Well I finally just called an asked if I had to take the exam and the agent said "absolutly not".   He said the only reason he asked me was so he could inform the investigator to bring his equipment and that the investigator would also ask. He aslso said that they could not  deny the claim because of my refusal to take the exam.  He even admitted that the exams held no water and thaey coulkd be passes easily with   countermeasures.  I made no comment to that. So he basically said that was a standad question,   They say your in good hands with Allstate but I fill like I'm stuck between two butt cheeks.

[Ed Earl]

Actually Sergeant, It would be more accurate to write that George's negative opinion of polygraphs was derived from his demonstrated inability to pass them accompanied by his unsubstantiated claim he answered the questions truthfully.

While there is no disagreement, (according to his account,) that he did not pass his polygraphs; there is some disagreement between he and the FBI and LAPD regarding his truthfulness(again according to his OWN account). In any case, I pointed Pugs towards George's story so he could read it and draw his own conclusion. Do you have something against that?    

While I wouldn't have mentioned it at all had he not impugned my integrity, I think it is reasonable to believe that most intelligent people would find it fair to question the veracity of a person who failed to meet  minimum standards for competitive employment regarding why they failed to meet those standards whatever they were, but especially so when the central issue was truthfulness.  However, if you guys will let this issue lay, I will too.

I mean all I really want to do here is fight against those who try to convince people they are better off lying and cheating than they are telling the truth. I don't really understand why encouraging people to be honest, honorable and truthful meets with such resistance.

[getrealalready]

Ed Earl,

I don't really understand why encouraging people to be honest, honorable and truthful meets with such resistance.

Would you object to requiring that polygraph examiners be honest, honorable, and truthful in conducting their examinations?  Furthermore would you consider it reasonable that every examinee be provided access to a downloadable digital video of his/her exam that could be independently reviewed for compliance with the aforementioned?

[T.M. Cullen]

Actually Sergeant, It would be more accurate to write that George's negative opinion of polygraphs was derived from his demonstrated inability to pass them accompanied by his unsubstantiated claim he answered the questions truthfully.

Actually Sancho, it would more accurate to write that George's negative opinion of polygraphs was derived from his inability to pass them while telling the truth dispite  YOUR and other industry pundits unsubstatiated claims that the polygraph can measure truthfulness from lies.

An intelligent person might ask if there were any evidence to substantiate that employment polygraphs (which is what GM took) could do what you just claimed it could do (with no citations as usual) why did the NAS review conclude otherwise?

Who should an intelligent person believe, the NAS or a person who makes a living telling people otherwise.  GM's tobacco industry analogy pertains.  

Was any evidence ever found that GM was working for Iran, or is a drug dealer as his FBI polygrapher accused him of?

TC

[Sergeant1107]

I mean all I really want to do here is fight against those who try to convince people they are better off lying and cheating than they are telling the truth. I don't really understand why encouraging people to be honest, honorable and truthful meets with such resistance.

This is a good example of the logical fallacy of a straw man argument.  The straw man argument presented is:  Anti-polygraph people are those who try to convince people they are better off lying, while pro-polygraph people are simply encouraging people to be honest.
It is a deliberately misleading oversimplification of the opposing positions, intended to make one side seem so extreme that no one is likely to agree with them.

My own experience in telling the truth during my polygraphs and having the examiners tell me I was clearly lying makes it easy for me to believe George when he says he also told the truth and failed.  There is no reason to believe George was lying unless you believe in the infallibility of the polygraph, and my own experiences have thoroughly convinced me that the polygraph is hardly infallible.

Once again, feel free to look over my previous posts and try to find where I suggested that it would be a good idea to lie.  I don't think you will find any examples.