Connecticut v. Reiner, Reiner & Bendett
Plaintiff state alleged that Reiner, a law firm, which also sells title insurance, used sham service, rental and other agreements to
conceal $142,200 in kickbacks and unlawful inducements between 2002 and 2005. In exchange, Absolute and Access allegedly steered title insurance business to the law firm. Connecticut law prohibits title insurance agents from paying for referrals.
Connecticut v. Guy Carpenter & Co., No. HHD-CV-07-40433778 (Conn. Super. Ct. Hartford Dist. 2007)
Plaintiff state alleged a series of conspiracies within the reinsurance industry, principally led by broker Guy Carpenter & Company, LLC, to fix prices and terms on reinsurance contracts purchased in Connecticut and throughout the United States and to mislead primary insurance company clients regarding Guy Carpenter?s role as an agent and underwriter for numerous reinsurance companies. Complaint alleges that Guy Carpenter conspired with numerous reinsurers to fix prices and output, foreclose competitors from access, allocate markets and eliminate competition in the reinsurance market.
Connecticut v. B-G Mechanical Services
State settled allegations of bid-rigging in the market for HVAC services for municipal and private business customers.
Connecticut v. Acordia (Super. Ct. Hartford Jud. Dist.)
State alleged that insurance companies were paying kickbacks to Acordia, an insurance broker, for steering business to the insurer.
Connecticut v. Haggett
Plaintiff state filed suit alleging industry-wide illegal bid rigging by companies and individuals in the heating, ventilation and airconditioning (HVAC) business over the course of several years. Some defendants have settled for $160,000 in civil penalties
Connecticut, Illinois & New York v. St. Paul Travelers
Plaintiff states charged St. Paul Travelers with illegal business steering, customer allocation, and bid rigging in the market for small business. The states alleged, and St. Paul Travelers did not deny, that millions of dollars in “contingent commissions” were paid to a number of brokers who “steered” business to St. Paul Travelers. Under the customer allocation scheme, Travelers was one of the insurers (with The Hartford and CNA) who secretly agreed with a broker to divide up the brokers small business customers in exchange for paying greater undisclosed contingent commissions to the broker.
New York ex rel. Spitzer v. Hartford Financial Services Group
Agreement between CT, NY and Hartford in which Hartford agreed to pay $20 million in restitution and fines, and implement reforms designed to bring fair play and transparency to the marketing of retirement products. Agreement resolved charges that insurance companies were making secret payments to insurance brokers to recommend group annuities to pension plans.
Connecticut v. Liberty Mutual (Conn. Super. Ct. Hartford Div. 2006)
State alleged that from 2001 through 2004, Liberty Mutual conspired with Marsh, AIG, ACE, Zurich and other insurers to leverage Marsh’s significant market share in the excess casualty insurance market in particular to rig bids and raise premium prices on insurance contracts. Liberty Mutual settled in 2010 for $2 million.
Connecticut v. Carabetta Enterprises, Inc.No. CV-83-0284039 (Conn. Super. Ct. Hartford 1983)
Owner of residential apartment complexes was enjoined from conditioning the rental of an apartment unit of the lessee?s agreement to purchase moving services or remodeling services from the lessor.
Connecticut v. New Canaan Chevron, Inc. et al., No. CV-83-0064654 (Conn. Super Ct. Norwalk Dist. 1983)
Retail gasoline dealers in Fairfield County, Connecticut were enjoined from agreeing on a uniform level of profit margin, and were further enjoined from refusing to deal with competitors that failed or refused to adhere to such pricing plan.
