.................

[ducklite]

You are referring to auto insurance (and I believe this is more of a problem here), but we are talking about homeowner's insurance.

This totally backs up my thoughts on affordability.

Compare the HO Insurance to auto insurance. You want to buy a new car, let's say one of those little Pontiac 2-seaters with a ragtop. The cost on the car is $25,000, and your payments will be $400 a month, roughly what you are paying now for you current 4 door sedan. You can afford the monthly payment, no problem. But then you find out that the insurance is going to go from $1200 a year to $3000 a year. That's an unacceptable amount that you can't afford, so instead you buy another sedan, because it's dependable and what you can afford.

Same thing with a home. You want to live in a certain area, it's where you'd like to live. The insurance to live there costs considerably more, and ends up making it not affordable to you. So instead you live in an equally fine but personally less desirable area 30 miles away which is affordable to you.

With everything in life we make choices. There are people who say "I have to live there". No, you don't. You can live 30 miles inland, you can find a new job in another state and move, there are lots of choices in our lives. We make choices based on our priorities. I choose to spend more on HO insurance than I "have" to, because I want the security of having no hassles on claims and a company with solid reserves. I sacrifice something else in my life to fund this choice. Anyone can do the same.

Anne

 

[Miss Jasmine]

You are referring to auto insurance (and I believe this is more of a problem here), but we are talking about homeowner's insurance.

So who do you work for?

It was mostly auto claims, I believe we had some homeowners claim as wel, but I didn't work on those, so that's why I didn't claim theml. From last year to now, I have read many articles about companies denying claims and not paying out on INSURED ITEMS. Why is this so difficult to believe?

 

[ducklite]

So who do you work for?

It was mostly auto claims, I believe we had some homeowners claim as wel, but I didn't work on those, so that's why I didn't claim theml. From last year to now, I have read many articles about companies denying claims and not paying out on INSURED ITEMS. Why is this so difficult to believe?

I totally believe that there are companies who are not paying claims. I also know that some people are trying to get claims paid that exceed what their policy will cover. My point is that before someone buys insurance, they should do a little research.

You wouldn't go to a doctor who has a lot of pending malpractice suits, why would you buy insurance from a company with many complaints with the insurance commission?

Anne

 

[Miss Jasmine]

I totally believe that there are companies who are not paying claims. I also know that some people are trying to get claims paid that exceed what their policy will cover. My point is that before someone buys insurance, they should do a little research.

You wouldn't go to a doctor who has a lot of pending malpractice suits, why would you buy insurance from a company with many complaints with the insurance commission?

Anne

yeah you're right, all these people in these situations didn't do any research. Screw them.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

It was mostly auto claims, I believe we had some homeowners claim as wel, but I didn't work on those, so that's why I didn't claim theml. From last year to now, I have read many articles about companies denying claims and not paying out on INSURED ITEMS. Why is this so difficult to believe?

I have no trouble believing that some insurance companies deny claims and don't pay on insured items. The company I worked at for over a decade did that and I suspect other companies do this also.

There are numerous reasons for claim denial, including, but not limited to, non-payment of premiums, attempted or actual fraud, determination that the loss was caused by a non-covered peril or that the loss was not covered by the policy, the total loss exceeded the policy value or the specific coverage paid for by the insured, etc. With widespread disasters like hurricanes the amount of attempted fraud dramatically increases. Therefore, it's not unusual for insurers to take extra time in settling claims.

After all, we'd hate to give MizBlu or anyone else more of a reason to keep grinding their axes than is necessary.

 

[ducklite]

yeah you're right, all these people in these situations didn't do any research. Screw them.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't be made whole.

What I am saying is that people who are complaining about not getting claims paid quickly are for the most part with companies who have a documented history of taking a long time to do so. This is the type of thing you should take into consideration when buying insurance.

People knew--or should have educated themselves--that some of these companies are slow pays, yet they bought the policy from them anyhow, rather than placing their coverage with a company who has a good reputation for fast and fair claim paying. Penny wise and pound foolish.

Anne

 

[ducklite]

I have no trouble believing that some insurance companies deny claims and don't pay on insured items. The company I worked at for over a decade did that and I suspect other companies do this also.

Ahhh, a former AIG'er LOL!

Additionally, I wonder how many of the claims from last year are being held up by technicalities invilving mortgage companies as opposed to teh insurance company. I bet that there's a measurable percentage that fall under that situational catagory.

Anne

 

[Tigger_Magic]

yeah you're right, all these people in these situations didn't do any research. Screw them.

It is well known within the insurance industry that the vast majority of people will purchase insurance, especially AUTO insurance, based on only one thing: PRICE. The single largest factor involved in insurance research: PRICE. The bottom line that most people want to get when asking for an insurance quote: PRICE.

That's not to say "screw them" when they have a claim. If they paid their premiums, they are entitled to have their claim(s) settled in a timely manner.

But too many people don't stop to consider factors like customer service, claims processing, underwriting, etc. when shopping for insurance. All they want is the lowest priced coverage. (I won't even go into the group that not only looks for the lowest price but also the absolute, bare, minimum coverage required by law. )

Everyone deserves prompt, reliable customer service. Usually that happens and there will be exceptions and errors made. It's unfortunate when it does occur and it gives the entire industry a black eye. I still think that this is the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Ahhh, a former AIG'er LOL!

Nope... one of their competitors. Think golf tournaments...

Additionally, I wonder how many of the claims from last year are being held up by technicalities invilving mortgage companies as opposed to teh insurance company. I bet that there's a measurable percentage that fall under that situational catagory.

Anne

This is a big issue in resolving claims, especially when there is either major or total loss under the homeowners policy. There are always "discussions" regarding coverage amounts, defining replacement costs vs. policy coverage, researching all the policy endorsements and additional coverages, etc. It's not as simple as looking at the numbers on the face of the policy and writing a check for that amount.

 

[MizBlu]

I'm not saying that insurer's shouldn't pay for covered perils. A good part of what you are seeing is people trying to get insurers to pay for non-covered perils. I personally know of someone who is fighting their insurance company, because the damage is more than the person's homeowners policy limits are for. Who's fault is that? Duh!

Yes, there are some rotten eggs out there. My point is that if people would stop buying from them, they would go out of business. They aren't the only game in town.

Like I stated earlier, much of the problem is with Citizen's. Well, there is always a choice other than Citizen's, but you are going to pay dearly for it. So anyone who chooses to insure with Citizen's, knowing full well that they are a cut rate agency, shouldn't expect much in the way of service from them.

Anne

Again, your source of information is your back passage. How do you know what claims people made to their insurance company? How are you so damned sure it was for "non-covered perils"? Bottom line: you don't know.

As to your "I personally know of someone who is fighting their insurance company, because the damage is more than the person's homeowners policy limits are for", save your duh's for them as they're the only one you can be sure of.

And I don't give a crap if it's Citizen's or Lloyds of London, when people pay for a service they have every right to expect that service.

Obviously, YMMV.

 

[MizBlu]

I have no trouble believing that some insurance companies deny claims and don't pay on insured items. The company I worked at for over a decade did that and I suspect other companies do this also.

There are numerous reasons for claim denial, including, but not limited to, non-payment of premiums, attempted or actual fraud, determination that the loss was caused by a non-covered peril or that the loss was not covered by the policy, the total loss exceeded the policy value or the specific coverage paid for by the insured, etc. With widespread disasters like hurricanes the amount of attempted fraud dramatically increases. Therefore, it's not unusual for insurers to take extra time in settling claims.

After all, we'd hate to give MizBlu or anyone else more of a reason to keep grinding their axes than is necessary.

This made me laugh. Here, sit down, have a drink. No sense in wasting good sparks.

P.S. Are you really trying to verify what I've been saying all along.

 

[mickeyfan2]

From last year to now, I have read many articles about companies denying claims and not paying out on INSURED ITEMS. Why is this so difficult to believe?

Does anybody know what percent of all claims were not paid? What percent was rejected by the policyholder? Etc. I believe that there are always some who don't get treated right, but what number? 1, 100, 1 thousand or 1 million? It does make a difference.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

This made me laugh. Here, sit down, have a drink. No sense in wasting good sparks.

P.S. Are you really trying to verify what I've been saying all along.

Old friend, you used to carefully read what people wrote before you responded. Trying a new approach, too?

Far be it from me to find common ground with an old adversary ( ), but I have acknowledged that from time to time insurers do deny claims, often for good, valid reasons. On rare occasions, insurers deny claims, delay claim payment, or offer less than fair settlements for not so legitimate reasons. The latter is not the norm, your personal grudges and protests to the contrary.

Again, I am sorry that you experienced less than desirable service from your insurer. As you said, if you paid for a service, you have a reasonable expectation of receiving said service. It's always unfortunate when this doesn't happen.

 

[sodaseller]

This issue
could justify 1000s of words. Since Andrew, P&C insurers have tried to pull out of Fla and get battled by the Ins. Commisoner, which resulted in et wondstorm pool and the FRPCJUA and Citizens, among other mechanism.

On a related noted, I got the following e-mail and will likely listen is

One year ago, companies were beginning to see some pricing relief in their insurance policies as insurance markets softened. To find out what can be expected during the current renewal season, please join us on Wednesday, November 2 at 11:00 a.m. (Eastern Time) for Marsh's New Reality of Risk panel discussion, "Property/Casualty Insurance-Market Update-Fall 2005." The senior economist for global forecasting from the Economist Intelligence Unit will join a panel of experts from Marsh to discuss how recent events--including an extremely active hurricane season--have affected the economy as well as trends and conditions in the property/casualty insurance markets.

Also, speaking to those in the industry, it will not causea as great risk as imagined because there are always undercutters out there because they are guaranteed, and the reinsurance "treaties" (that's what they are called), tend to reduce the impact of hurricane losses in the portfolio

 

[ducklite]

And I don't give a crap if it's Citizen's or Lloyds of London, when people pay for a service they have every right to expect that service.

Obviously, YMMV.

You made my point. With Citizen's, you DON'T pay! They are charging below market rates, which is why they are so under-funded for reserves.

Anne

 

[ducklite]

Also, speaking to those in the industry, it will not causea as great risk as imagined because there are always undercutters out there because they are guaranteed, and the reinsurance "treaties" (that's what they are called), tend to reduce the impact of hurricane losses in the portfolio

Reinsurance is exactly why Chubb didn't get creamed with Katrina. They had considerable exposure from a commercial lines perspective, but it was adequately reserved and reinsured. Losses were below what was originally anticipated, both internally and by the street. BTW, I do not work for Chubb.

Anne

 

[DWDreams]

Reinsurance is exactly why Chubb didn't get creamed with Katrina. They had considerable exposure from a commercial lines perspective, but it was adequately reserved and reinsured. Losses were below what was originally anticipated, both internally and by the street. BTW, I do not work for Chubb.

Anne

I do, actually, and am curious what you mean by internally if you don't work there?

 

[MizBlu]

Old friend, you used to carefully read what people wrote before you responded. Trying a new approach, too?

Far be it from me to find common ground with an old adversary ( ), but I have acknowledged that from time to time insurers do deny claims, often for good, valid reasons. On rare occasions, insurers deny claims, delay claim payment, or offer less than fair settlements for not so legitimate reasons. The latter is not the norm, your personal grudges and protests to the contrary.

Again, I am sorry that you experienced less than desirable service from your insurer. As you said, if you paid for a service, you have a reasonable expectation of receiving said service. It's always unfortunate when this doesn't happen.

Thanks for the kind words, TM, but I do have to correct you. I had no problem with my insurance company, Tower Hill. They were more than fair and gave us a great settlement.

Unfortunately, my experience was not the norm here. Allstate, State Farm, and Nationwide were horrible. I can only judge what I saw happen here.

 

[MizBlu]

You made my point. With Citizen's, you DON'T pay! They are charging below market rates, which is why they are so under-funded for reserves.

Anne

I didn't know Citizen's was free.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Thanks for the kind words, TM, but I do have to correct you. I had no problem with my insurance company, Tower Hill. They were more than fair and gave us a great settlement.

Unfortunately, my experience was not the norm here. Allstate, State Farm, and Nationwide were horrible. I can only judge what I saw happen here.

So your first-hand experience which you can report on was fair and you got a great settlement. OTOH, your evidence to condemn 3 other companies is based on heresay. OK, I think I understand now.