Insurance broker Willis Towers Watson (WTW) is accusing rival Lockton Companies and 18 former employees of WTW’s Northeast construction insurance team of engineering a “smash and grab” operation that began on August 19.
On that day, 18 members of WTW’s Northeast construction team, including senior leadership, resigned between 8:02 am and 8:46 am, according to the WTW complaint filed in Superior Court in Boston on August 24.
Also, according to the WTW complaint, within 48 hours the departed employees had taken 13 WTW clients worth more than $5 million in annual revenue with them to Lockton, along with confidential business information.
WTW alleges that the departed employees have violated non-solicitation and confidentiality agreements and that Lockton aided and abetted them in the execution of the “smash and grab” operation. WTW argues that its restrictive covenants are reasonable and common in the insuranc
e brokerage industry, and maintains that Lockton requires its employees to sign very similar non-solicitation covenants.
WTW is seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block further Lockton contact with its clients, enforcement of its employment agreements, invalidation of the policies written with the new Lockton employees, and disgorgement of any gains and relationships Lockton has realized from the former WTW clients, as well as damages.
“Lockton should be required to disgorge the client relationships that it wrongfully obtained from WTW–relief that Lockton itself requested and obtained in the context of
a comparably extreme raid. In other words, the clients Lockton stole should be told that they need to go back to WTW or another competitor. Lockton should not b
See more beautiful photo albums Here >>>
e allowed to profit from its unlawful conduct. Again, this is the same relief Lockton asked for when it was raided by a competitor,” WTW told the court.
The former WTW senior leaders cited in the complaint are Michael Scott and Thomas Grandmaison. Most of the 18 employees worked in the Boston office, although several worked with the Boston team from Pennsylvania and one did so from Alabama.
A federal judge has declined to approve a class action lawsuit accusing GEICO of underpaying losses for totaled vehicles in New Jersey. The court declined to approve the class after concluding that individual issues outweighed the commonality of the proposed class.
The purported class action sought to challenge GEICO’s use of a factor, also used by other insurers, that adjusts the actual cash value (ACV) of a vehicle to account for t
he condition of the vehicle based on factors such as options and mileage, or as otherwise explained “to bring the ACV from retail to private party condition.”
Jessica Dinicola-Ortiz alleged GEICO contracted to pay her and class members the actual cash value for their totaled cars, but GEICO’s condition adjustment unlawfully changed that value. She alleged that GEICO underpaid her and she further maintained that GEICO similarly illegally adjusted the values for potentially tens of thousands of other New Jersey claimants.
