Hurricane Sandy claim denials are starting to be issued. This is typical; hurricane claim denials usually start four to six weeks after the catastrophe. I cannot overemphasize the value of FC&S materials and other insurance industry reference sources when researching whether Hurricane Sandy denials can stand up to challenge.
What do you get your friendly adjuster for a Christmas stocking stuffer? How about an itunes app called “Claim Denied!” Here is the description:
A recent IRMI article titled “Limiting the Interruption in Business Interruption” discussed the importance of considering payroll during the risk assessment phase of obtaining business insurance coverage. The forms regarding business income and ordinary payroll are hyperlinked for ease of use and understanding.
Many of our clients come to our doors with perplexed looks on their faces and denial letters in their hands. Dizzied after a long battle with their carriers, which our clients seemed to have lost to purported words in their policies that they are presumed to have bargained for, they come to us for understanding and hoping that the policy they purchased is not a pamphlet full of meaningless words.
The attempts by Mississippi’s Gene Taylor to craft an insurance product that fully covers hurricane losses seems to be having trouble, but not because Gene Taylor is not trying. While the House of Representatives passed a bill supported by Taylor which includes coverage for the perils of wind and storm surge into one policy, one Republican Senator offered a compromise bill which does not accomplish that but merely proposes a different method of dispute resolution. As reported in the National Underwriter, both Taylor and the insurance industry think the compromise legislation does not work.
Mississippi Representative Gene Taylor successfully placed language into House Bill H.R. 1264—“the Multiple Peril Insurance Act”— which would require “Write Your Own” insurers participating in the National Flood Program to remove anti-concurrent causation language from their all risk insurance policies. Taylor’s house was destroyed in Hurricane Katrina. Many of his neighbors’ insurance claims were denied based on the continuing wind versus flood insurance coverage controversy which I noted recently in Texas Windstorm Insurer Settles 2,400 Hurricane Ike Slab Claims.
The United States House of Representatives has unanimously passed a bill reinstating and extending the National Flood Insurance Program until September 30, 2010, according to an article in the National Underwriter, New NFIP Extension Bill Passes House; Senate Action Uncertain. The bill (H.R. 5569) will be sent to the Senate for further action. My suggestion in Flood Insurance is Harder to Find and Politics is One Reason was to call all Congressmen. Now we are down to just the Senators that need to get their act together.
Risk managers involved with analyzing a corporation’s enterprise risk have a myriad of perils to be concerned about. A risk sometimes overlooked from an insurance perspective is brand value and expenses associated with the investment of brand marketing and advertising. An article in the New York Times, Insuring Endorsements Against Athletes’ Scandals, noted that just seven companies that had endorsements from Tiger Woods lost over $12 billion in market value during the month following the announcement of Woods’ troubles.
The Florida legislator is full of "flip flop" legislators that are reversing laws made in 2005 and 2006 which supported lower insurance rates and protected insurance consumers from unscrupulous insurers. Governor Charlie Crist ran on a platform of helping Floridians keep insurance rates down and he is sticking to that promise even as other politicians who once voted for such laws are now firmly supporting the opposite measures. These "flip flop" politicians are filing laws that would allow rates to go as high as the insurance industry can make them and laws that take benefits away from consumers following disaster. Crist seems to be standing tall against the insurance industry and for the people, unlike other politicians who are currently getting their responses and "speaking points" from insurance lobbyists.
Three consumer advocates published a letter, Property Insurance Deregulation Too Costly, which claims that currently proposed Florida legislation calling for no regulation of insurance rates is bad for Floridians "because the average consumer does not have the resources or information to determine when a rate is excessive, the opportunity for the [insurance] company to abuse consumers exists." I agree, and for many more reasons than just that.