Archive

Archive for the ‘Insurance Technical’ Category

Insurance as a Commodity

Earlier in my blog I theorized that “Risk Bearing”may be a “Commodity”.  Recent events have led me to believe this is not a true statement.   Different insurers, even in Personal Lines, are deviating from standard forms and coverage.  Only an experienced professional is going to know this.   Product differentiation between insurers renders “Risk Bearing” a risky purchase.

Consumers NEED advice as well as insurance.

Food Trucks and GL

January 27, 2014
Mealey’s Insurance – Panel: Court Erred In Ruling Food Truck Was ‘Auto’ And Not ‘Mobile Equipment’

LOS ANGELES – A California appellate court on Jan. 27 ruled that a commercial general liability insurer has a duty to defend and indemnify a food truck lessor insured against a products liability lawsuit, further finding that, contrary to the lower court’s ruling, the insured’s auto insurer is not liable because its policy’s completed operations provision bars coverage for products liability claims (American States Insurance Co. v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, et al., No. B243003, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 5; 2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 74).

Court Decides Food Truck Was “Mobile Equipment” Covered by CGL Policy

http://www.acicnet.org/hot-topics/2014/02/04/court-decides-food-truck-was-mobile-equipment-covered-by-cgl-policy

Are Dog Bites a Homeowners Problem for Insurers?

Check out the following Insurance Journal article if you wonder if dog bites are a problem for insurers:

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/east/2012/09/19/263512.htm

The Insurance Company “Bluffing Letter”

Have you had a client whose claim was denied but you felt really uncomfortable about the coverage determination?

I have been working on quite a few denied claims in the recent future.   It have become apparent to me  that Insurers are using a strategy to issue a “bluffing letter”.    It looks like a denial and will discourage all but the most resolute Insured or Agent.

The letter basically says, “We don’t this covered and gives a litany of reasons.”   We will not indemnify or defend this claim….!”         The Insured files it and basically goes away without questioning it.    Some of these claims should be covered.  I have gotten several paid recently and in some we have filed suit.   (Of course, there are also many legitimate denials.)

Agents…  Don’t let your Insureds be taken advantage of this way.  ALWAYS follow up and when you need to involve an insurance expert such as myself, call us!.    “My business is knowing your business”. Let us help you protect your Insureds!   We can likely keep you out of an E & O claim!

 

 

Beware the Skunk!

For over ten years I have been discussing the “narrowing” of coverage due to the increased pressure from reinsurers  and rating agencies for increased profits and decreased loss ratios.   One of my key examples has been a broadening definition of “pollution”.

In the past two months I have either been involved in or heard of several claims being denied for “skunk spray”. This is a perfect example of profiteering.   A skunk is neither a vermin nor is skunk spray pollution.      But, beware…   Some have denied altogether and some have denied coverage for contents, EVEN WITH AN HO 15 ENDORSEMENT!