Insurance coverage Model Promoting Versus Insurance coverage Firm Remedy | Property Insurance coverage Protection Regulation Weblog


Sarah Parker wrote me, forwarding a fast studying weblog, Liberty Mutual to Refund $7.7 Million in Consent Order: What Minnesota Policyholders Must Know. I consider she despatched it to me due to my current publish, Liberty, Liberty, Li-ber-ty.  

One of many necessary factors of her publish was the complexity of many massive insurance coverage organizations, which many assume are only one firm beneath one model: 

To most of the people, they may solely see a most important commerce title because the model providing their insurance coverage coverage. Nonetheless, behind the scenes, the precise phrases of their coverage, the charges they’re provided, and the regulatory compliance behind that coverage could be managed by a subsidiary.

The naming of a number of corporations in such orders underscores the complexity of huge firms and the regulatory panorama they navigate. With every state having its personal rules, managing these can get advanced!

It’s a testomony to the thoroughness of regulatory our bodies in making certain that each entity, no matter its relationship with a mum or dad firm, stays compliant with the regulation.

For customers, it’s a reminder that the model title they’re conversant in may characterize an internet of interconnected corporations working collectively to supply their companies.

Insurance coverage manufacturers typically promote worth and in addition point out one thing about honest claims service. In Insurance coverage Firm Ads and Guarantees of Peace of Thoughts Versus the Actuality of Claims Remedy, I instructed that regulators require insurance coverage corporations to show over the interior claims working tips to find out if the insurance coverage corporations are really offering that honest claims service: 

Why shouldn’t insurance coverage regulators require insurance coverage corporations to supply claims bulletins and claims tips about how claims shall be dealt with on the level of sale and in the course of the claims course of? If the insurer is performing in good religion, why wouldn’t it be afraid to show over and publish these directives? It would result in significantly better and honest therapy, which is promised within the first place.

The federal authorities has its flood claims guide publicly accessible for all to see how adjusters are speculated to deal with claims. Why shouldn’t there be a rule supported by the Nationwide Affiliation of Insurance coverage Commissioners requiring all insurance coverage corporations to publish their claims manuals concerning the dealing with of first-party property insurance coverage insurance policies on-line? What’s there to cover?  

I’ve by no means heard of an insurance coverage firm publicly saying this could be dangerous public coverage. Such a rule could cease a number of the dishonest of dangerous market gamers and supply better belief within the trade. 

Thought For The Day 

An absence of transparency leads to mistrust and a deep sense of insecurity.

—Dalai Lama


Leave a Comment