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

[ducklite]

You're really sure you know exactly what someone paid for?

While your crystal ball is working, could you please tell me the winning numbers for tonight's Fantasy 5?

So the discussion is now moving in the direction of "you may've paid your premium, but you dumb ***, you paid it to the wrong one".

As Rodney Dangerfield said: Tough crowd.

And the fact is, whether you had Allstate, State Farm, Nationwide or any other insurance company, you paid your premium for a service. And that's the issue, not who you paid it to.

And just as a side discussion, can someone please answer why people are so willing to make excuses for bad service from the insurance companies and bad service from their government, but can't wait to place the blame on the poor ******* who did everything right and got screwed?

I used to see this all the time in the aerospace industry. People would bend over backwards to placate an incompetent, less-than-honest supplier, but would then turn around and curse the customer upside-down for demanding a decent product.

What's wrong with this picture.

Your picture is wrong. When you CHOOSE your insurance company--and yes, you have a CHOICE--you need to look at more than the cost. You can pay thousands of dollars to Mel and Louie's Insurance Store, but when it comes to claims and financial stability, how are they? You don't know? Well, you best freaking find out before you sign on the dotted line. Most people shop insurance for price. That's a fools game. You need to shop for quality, and spend the extra $200-400 a year for it.

It's called using your brain and taking some personal responsibility to make the right choice based on quality as opposed to cost. It's kind of like buying the cheap laundry detergent in the Dollar Store. Yes, it's a lot less expensive, but you need twice as much and it doesn't get your clothes as clean--so in the long run it's going to cost you more.

Anne

 

[ducklite]

Actually, in the case of Tower Hill, you did get champagne at a beer price. When we went with Tower Hill in 2000, their rates were lower than the mass marketers and still are in this area.

Be careful of the logical fallacy.

I got a quote from them, Chubb, and Allstate this year. Allstate was about 35% lower, Chubb about 35% higher than Tower Hill. Chubb has a proven track record of paying claims, and is very healthy financially (I'm an investor with a good chunk of cash in them), but we decided to stay with Tower Hill. They've got good financials and I've heard great things about their claims resolution.

Anne

 

[mickeyfan2]

My observation has to do with the fact that it seems to come as a shock to the insurance companies when they have to deliver the service, in the form of paying claims, to people who've been paying for that service. QUOTE]

I have never know of anybody whose insurance company did not pay for a coverage that they had paid for. Do you know of any cases?

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Take it up with TM. He's the one who brought in the "bad investment" angle.

Time out, old friend. Put your glasses on and re-read my posts. I believe it was you who brought up the issue of bad investments. I simply pointed out that during the 90's, especially after the Internet bubble burst, investments did not offer the same bang for the buck as they did in the booming 80's and 90's. Let's do try to be accurate here.

 

[Miss Jasmine]

My observation has to do with the fact that it seems to come as a shock to the insurance companies when they have to deliver the service, in the form of paying claims, to people who've been paying for that service. QUOTE]

I have never know of anybody whose insurance company did not pay for a coverage that they had paid for. Do you know of any cases?

I know of SEVERAL cases. I worked for an attorney a few years ago and we filed against peoples own insurance companies on a regular basis. Usually once we filed it would settle. This was more automobile-type stuff, but if that's going on, then it is going on with homeowners as well.

On the Auto side stay far away from Progressive. It was our worst offender. The least we had problems with was State Farm. This is in regard to the mass insurers.

 

[mickeyfan2]

There are a number of factors involved in determining auto insurance premiums, including where you live, the cars you drive, your driving record, how you use the car(s), who drives the car(s), etc. Auto insurance is a rather competitive market and it pays to shop around for the best deal. It also pays to ask about discounts for having multiple cars covered under 1 policy, safe driver discounts, safety equipment discounts (anti-lock brakes, multiple airbags, anti-theft devices, etc.). Rates can vary greatly between companies for the exact same coverage. A final way to reduce your premiums somewhat is to increase your deductible, especially if you are a safe driver.

Also they take into consideration the value of the cars that you will hit. It most people drive Mercedes, then higher rates.

 

[mickeyfan2]

Whoa, stop right there, pilgrim. If you think it's uncommon for folks to be treated unfairly by insurance companies, I suggest you leave MA and take a little trip to "Charley country", Florida. It'll be an eyeopener.

Would you mind elaborating on this?

 

[mickeyfan2]

In MD we had a tropical storm two years ago called Isabelle. There are still folks living in trailers because the insurance companies don't want to pay what needs to be done to get those folks back in their homes.

We had damage from Isabelle and our insurance company did pay us on the spot. Ours was minor damage not major damage. They even paid for something that I did not notice.

 

[MizBlu]

Your picture is wrong. When you CHOOSE your insurance company--and yes, you have a CHOICE--you need to look at more than the cost. You can pay thousands of dollars to Mel and Louie's Insurance Store, but when it comes to claims and financial stability, how are they? You don't know? Well, you best freaking find out before you sign on the dotted line. Most people shop insurance for price. That's a fools game. You need to shop for quality, and spend the extra $200-400 a year for it.

It's called using your brain and taking some personal responsibility to make the right choice based on quality as opposed to cost. It's kind of like buying the cheap laundry detergent in the Dollar Store. Yes, it's a lot less expensive, but you need twice as much and it doesn't get your clothes as clean--so in the long run it's going to cost you more.

Anne

Yada, yada, yada!

Here's the big picture: You're bending over backwards trying to rationalize away someone paying for a service and not getting it.

You're also trying to use as an excuse how smart you are over the rest of the "dumb *****" who believe when they paid for a service and they should get that service.

All your talk about "shopping around" and "choice" are irrelevant fluff and are simply excuses for bad service and in some cases, outright fraud.

You're indignation is being placed on the victim, and not the perpetrator as it should be.

Bottom line: if you paid for a service, and I don't care who you paid for that service, you should receive that service.

No excuses and no rationalizations will ever make that simple concept wrong.

End of story.

 

[MizBlu]

I know of SEVERAL cases. I worked for an attorney a few years ago and we filed against peoples own insurance companies on a regular basis. Usually once we filed it would settle. This was more automobile-type stuff, but if that's going on, then it is going on with homeowners as well.

On the Auto side stay far away from Progressive. It was our worst offender. The least we had problems with was State Farm. This is in regard to the mass insurers.

In some people's "top of the food chain world" this never happens and if it does, it only happens to the ones too stupid to "shop around".

In lawyer's terminology, I rest my case.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Yada, yada, yada!

Here's the big picture: You're bending over backwards trying to rationalize away someone paying for a service and not getting it.

You're also trying to use as an excuse how smart you are over the rest of the "dumb *****" who believe when they paid for a service and they should get that service.

All your talk about "shopping around" and "choice" are irrelevant fluff and are simply excuses for bad service and in some cases, outright fraud.

You're indignation is being placed on the victim, and not the perpetrator as it should be.

Bottom line: if you paid for a service, and I don't care who you paid for that service, you should receive that service.

No excuses and no rationalizations will ever make that simple concept wrong.

End of story.

You may want to make sure your axe-grinding area is free from any flammable materials. With all the sparks you're generating, I'd hate for you to have to file an insurance claim for fire damage that was self-inflicted.

 

[ducklite]

Yada, yada, yada!

Here's the big picture: You're bending over backwards trying to rationalize away someone paying for a service and not getting it.

You're also trying to use as an excuse how smart you are over the rest of the "dumb *****" who believe when they paid for a service and they should get that service.

All your talk about "shopping around" and "choice" are irrelevant fluff and are simply excuses for bad service and in some cases, outright fraud.

You're indignation is being placed on the victim, and not the perpetrator as it should be.

Bottom line: if you paid for a service, and I don't care who you paid for that service, you should receive that service.

No excuses and no rationalizations will ever make that simple concept wrong.

End of story.

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

 

[Miss Jasmine]

In some people's "top of the food chain world" this never happens and if it does, it only happens to the ones too stupid to "shop around".

In lawyer's terminology, I rest my case.

Well I shopped around and I guess I am stupid, my insurer is State Farm. Some people just can't afford the Premium Prices of the froo-froo insurers. I at least know I have my legal background to fall back on to fight for my money. Others aren't as fortunate.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

In some people's "top of the food chain world" this never happens and if it does, it only happens to the ones too stupid to "shop around".

In lawyer's terminology, I rest my case.

But in judicial terminology, you've failed to prove your case by a preponderance of evidence. All you've produced is some well-fed grudges and limited ancedotal evidence. Based on this, you expect the court of public opinion to soundly condemn an entire industry? Most first year law students would present a better case than this.

You may harbor resentment over your own experiences with insurance in the wake of the hurricanes over the past couple of years. You may even have some complaints from others. But this doesn't prove some sinister national conspiracy by the insurance industry to scam innocent homeowners.

Given the level of fraud that is attempted on insurance companies, it's not unlikely for them to take time to thoroughly investigate claims submitted in the wake of wildfires, tornados and hurricanes. I'm sorry you've had issues with your choice of insurer.

 

[mickeyfan2]

Yada, yada, yada!

Here's the big picture: You're bending over backwards trying to rationalize away someone paying for a service and not getting it.

You're also trying to use as an excuse how smart you are over the rest of the "dumb *****" who believe when they paid for a service and they should get that service.

All your talk about "shopping around" and "choice" are irrelevant fluff and are simply excuses for bad service and in some cases, outright fraud.

You're indignation is being placed on the victim, and not the perpetrator as it should be.

Bottom line: if you paid for a service, and I don't care who you paid for that service, you should receive that service.

No excuses and no rationalizations will ever make that simple concept wrong.

End of story.

I think that what ducklite is saying is correct. Just paying a premium does not guarantee payment. You need to make sure that the permium is paid to a reputable company that actually has assets with which to make payment.

I never once saw ducklite state that she was smarter or even imply it.

Shopping around is not irrelevant fluff. Trying to get something that you are not covered for is irrelevant fluff.

 

[ducklite]

Well I shopped around and I guess I am stupid, my insurer is State Farm. Some people just can't afford the Premium Prices of the froo-froo insurers. I at least know I have my legal background to fall back on to fight for my money. Others aren't as fortunate.

Adequate homeowners insurance should be looked at as part of your monthly housing expense. If you can't afford it, then you can't afford the home you are living in, and should find alternate housing that is affordable to you. I mean this in a very general way, it is not directed towards you specifically.

Adequate should be looked at not only as having enough coverage, the right types of coverage, and also having insurance with a company that has a proven track record of paying claims and a strong financial position.

Anne

 

[Miss Jasmine]

I think that what ducklite is saying is correct. Just paying a premium does not guarantee payment. You need to make sure that the permium is paid to a reputable company that actually has assets with which to make payment.

I never once saw ducklite state that she was smarter or even imply it.

Shopping around is not irrelevant fluff. Trying to get something that you are not covered for is irrelevant fluff.

The cases which I referenced were for covered items. These were REPUTABLE companies with ASSETS in which to make payment.

 

[Miss Jasmine]

Adequate homeowners insurance should be looked at as part of your monthly housing expense. If you can't afford it, then you can't afford the home you are living in, and should find alternate housing that is affordable to you.

Anne

Just when I think you can't be anymore condescending...SURPRISE.

 

[mickeyfan2]

The cases which I referenced were for covered items. These were REPUTABLE companies with ASSETS in which to make payment.

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

 

[ducklite]

Just when I think you can't be anymore condescending...SURPRISE.

I hit the button too soon. If you go back and read, I added quite a bit to that statement. I apologize, as I didn't mean to direct the comments towards you specifically, it should have been more generalized.

Anne