Cigar smoking and Life Insurance premiums.

[Ahbroody]

Well allstates pretty big and they lost a 16 million dollar bad faith claim around two years ago. I am pretty sure with minimal effort I can find articles about what ever company you work for settling lawsuits or getting judgements against them.

I will say the following. When the person first calls the first thing done is to see if the policy is enforce or has lapsed for some reason. After this the claim is triaged and the adjuster gets it, amoung determining what happened is asking a series of questions based on the policy and facts to determine exposure and if another person is liable for claim. If not then it needs to be determined if insureds policy will cover and if there was anything done that would exclude coverage. It was not a small insurance company its serves the whole country. Coverage is always checked and the company is always trying to determine if they are not responsible for paying.

Insurance companies are businesses with shareholders. The goal of any business is to make profits. Paying claims and making as much profit as possible are in direct conflict.

You said your piece I have now said my piece . We are definitely not going to agree. I quit because I hated it you love it.

As to ontopic wife was called by her screener today. She is set for next monday. I am still waiting to hear from mine. Hopefully tomorrow. Looks like next week for me also.

[Blueface]

Originally Posted by Ahbroody

Well allstates pretty big and they lost a 16 million dollar bad faith claim around two years ago. I am pretty sure with minimal effort I can find articles about what ever company you work for settling lawsuits or getting judgements against them.

I never inferred perfection in our industry. Sometimes bad faith suits are as result of being set up. Sometimes they come from mistakes. More times than not, they come from mistakes, not intentional acts. Adjusters are human an din some states, you miss one word on a letter and that constitues bad faith. In Florida, attorneys ask for the dumbest of things in letters of representation, buried in an evident way hoping you miss one and hence are in bad faith. It is unjust to paint all insurance companies and adjusters with the same brush.

I will say the following. When the person first calls the first thing done is to see if the policy is enforce or has lapsed for some reason.

It is a business. Of course this should be the first thing they do. If coverage is not in force, would you want to pay for something you did not owe? When you go to the dealer for service, don't they check to see if your car is still under warranty?

After this the claim is triaged and the adjuster gets it, amoung determining what happened is asking a series of questions based on the policy and facts to determine exposure and if another person is liable for claim.

That is called "Subrogation". If someone else is responsible, from whom you can collect from, from which you can reimburse deductibles to insureds or lower overall premium by reducing exposure, wouldn't you do it?

If not then it needs to be determined if insureds policy will cover and if there was anything done that would exclude coverage.

Policies are contracts. They contain coverages, conditions and exclusions. Again, what is so wrong with adhering to the contract and if an exclusion exists, it applies? The good thing is after many years at it, you don't need to look for the exclusions. You know them the minute you see a claim and likewise, you know there is coverage afforded the minute you see a valid claim.

It was not a small insurance company its serves the whole country. Coverage is always checked and the company is always trying to determine if they are not responsible for paying.

And if coverage exists? Which is likely the majority of the times? Again, it is a business. Don't understand why this is a bad thing.

Insurance companies are businesses with shareholders. The goal of any business is to make profits. Paying claims and making as much profit as possible are in direct conflict.

First part correct. The rest not. To correct it, containment of costs is the way to make money, with increased revenue from writing new business, but more importantly, keeping older customers happy. The money is made as result of profitable long term renewals and the profits from investments, not from the claims savings.

You said your piece I have now said my piece . We are definitely not going to agree. I quit because I hated it you love it.

True. Apparently you were asked to act in a way I have never been in 28 years.

As to ontopic wife was called by her screener today. She is set for next monday. I am still waiting to hear from mine. Hopefully tomorrow. Looks like next week for me also.

See in bold.

[Ahbroody]

Originally Posted by Blueface

See in bold.

Like I said we are not going to agree. As much as I want to respond to issues I see in your reply I am going to pass because as I said you love it I hated it.

The one thing I will say is as for your bad faith argument I can post pages of court rulings that have nothing to do with florida and show a really ugly side of the insurance industry as a whole as well as some articles showing insurance companies hiring firms to raise profits. Is really kind of not the focus of this discussion though and would really derail things.


ckay
Hopefully I get a call tomorrow from the rep. I will disclose the occassional cigar dont worry. As I told my wife it is what it is and I dont like the idea of lying to save a buck. Ckay I will PM you about the term issues I was debating this with the wife.