Insurance company anger

You might find this story of interest:
http://www.thebostonchannel.com/buyerbeware/3339794/detail.html

They also had a follow-up story that mentioned:

You have my sympathy.

Thirteen years ago we filed a claim for construction material which were stolen from the site. Insurance was cancelled immediately---"high risk".

We were able to get coverage from another company, but the feeling of being exploited lingers.

http://clarkhoward.com/library/tips/homeowners_insurance.html

Seems to be happening a lot these days. Can't something be done?

I don't know why you don't see that companies ought to be able to do what they want without some government agency sticking up for the common consumer. Any solid conservative would know that the business of business is business and if an individual has a problem with that, well, he can just take his business elsewhere.

There is absolutely no reason why you should write your State Insurance Commissioner to report the facts of this matter. Why, that would create a hostile business environment. Supposing other persons who felt victimized by, let's say, their medical insurance company, felt compelled to seek assistance in dealing with a multi-billion dollar company on a claim? What a terrific waste of taxpayer dollars when it's obvious that folks can do it on their own or do without. These liberals who are constantly carping about the unfairness of the system to individuals make me ill. Don't they make you ill too?

Joe

Sorry, couldn't resist.....Write to your State Insurance Commissioner, state the facts of the case and ask them to review them with your insurance company.....calmly inform insurance company that you have done so..... ask for a review of your request for coverage by a supervisor... if denied, request for a subsequent review by that supervisor's department head. Wear them down, just like they do us.

Meanwhile, do shop around for insurance, you may even save some money.

And one more thing, these days one should shop for insurance on a yearly basis for their car and home. Rates and coverages change and sending in the check every month year-in and year-out is what the insurance company hopes for, but it doesn't build anything like what used to known as loyalty to the customer.

Good Luck,
Joe

Oh, sometimes that experience rating can affect the next person to buy the home, too - just to brighten up the day.

what roger sez is the dirty secret of "due diligence" on behalf of realtors and carriers.

Joe is being snidely again but , if your carrier is in a state where the insurance commisioner is not in the insurance companys pocket, you may have some suitable action taken on behalf of policyholders and others, like you, who were recently clipped out of coverage. We had a series of secondary "excess" policies that were cut and , since the carrier made some really flaky claims that we were overinflating values of antiques, we were a "risk"
WELL DUHH, thats what insurance companies are for .the pa insurance commish really helped out
They really piss me off also. As my attorney said
"The job of an insurance company is to take your money and never let you get it back"

My wife just got rear ended which basically totalled her older Acura, which we were saving for our daughter. It sucks having to file a claim because I know they will probably raise our rates then cancel us later. But what can you do? California's lack of "no fault" coverage is a real pain, because they urge you to take on the other driver's insurance company directly. Right. Hire an attorney maybe? What the hell do we pay these insurers for anyway?

I just told my insurance rep - you handle it. I'll pay my deductible up front if necessary because I better get it back. You don't get rear ended and have any fault in the matter, and I expect them to make that very clear to the other insurance company. Why should I/we take up a huge amount of our time doing THEIR job?

Makes no sense.

snide!!

Moi???

yeh voux joe
Today we are all Americans . Unified by the deaths of Ray Charles and Ronald Reagan

I'll unite for Ray Charles--even with the snide.

McG - did they state specifically in their non-renewal notice that it was because of those claims?

Yes. They said because we had 3 claims in 6 years we were too risky to insure. We've had 2 of the worst winters and the ice build up was ridiculous. we replaced the roof last summer to avoid these issues, but apparently that doesn't matter.

And Joe,

This is interesting info, thanks. (In the process of buying a new house ourselves.)

If the other driver was at fault, then the other driver's insurance should pay for the damage. If the other driver was uninsured or under-insured, then your policy should pay under the UM or UIM coverages of your auto policy. You needn't file suit against the other driver unless the other driver's insurance doesn't cover the damage (and the other driver has some assets -- first rule of civil law: never sue poor people).


Yeah, sometimes free market capitalism sucks.

Good advice. Just don't do the same thing with your life and/or health insurance.

Prohibited and Deceptive Insurance Practices
Hi there:

Most likely, your state has laws concerning "PROHIBITED PRACTICES IN INSURANCE BUSINESS." Most states have their laws posted online.

In my state, it is prohibited practice for insurance companies to misrepresent their coverage. You can probably argue that you have been with the company for 19 years under the assurance that if you paid your premiums, you would be covered for specified losses. Under that contractual assurance, you made 3 claims in the last 6 years for damage to your home caused by winter storms (acts of God beyond your control and typical for your geographical area). As a result of exercising your legal and contractual right to collect for your losses in accordance with your contract, your insurer now refuses to renew your insurance contract (after collecting premiums from you for nearly 2 full decades). If you must risk nonrenewal or cancellation of your home owner's policy simply because you presented claims for covered losses, then you are not receiving the benefit of your bargain and the insurance company is not acting in good faith.

Inasmuch as your three claims for property damage were due to winter storms typical for your geographical area--your insurance company's designation of your status as "high risk" as an excuse not to renew your policy is a sham. Your company is punishing you for submitting claims that the company was contractually obligated to pay--after all, the company collected the premiums.

In my state, the following is a prohibited, unfair, discriminatory business practice:

"Making or permitting any unfair discrimination between individuals or risks of the same class and of essentially the same hazard by refusing to insure, refusing to renew, canceling, or limiting the amount of insurance coverage on a property or casualty risk solely because of the geographic location of the risk, unless the action is the result of the application of sound underwriting and actuarial principles related to actual or reasonably anticipated loss experience."

Because you were not personally negligent or reckless in causing the damages--the damages were due to storms typical for your geographical area--it appears your insurance company is discriminating against you because your home is located in a geographic area where it had storm damage 3 times out of the last 6 years.

You and your insurance company established a relationship. Based upon your lengthy past business history (prior dealings), your insurance company automatically renewed your insurance contract every year for nearly 20 years. Even though you submitted claims--you didn't do anything wrong. You paid for your insurance and you had a contractual right to expect coverage in return for your premiums. There was no reason why you could not rely on your prior dealings and expect the company to renew the policy just as it has in the past. By refusing to renew your policy, your insurance company is sending a message to you and all other company policy holders: "If you make a claim--even if you have a contractual right to do so--don't expect us to renew your contract."

You can argue that your insurance company acted in bad faith in labeling you as "high risk" and refusing to renew your contract after doing business with them for 2 decades.

Consider contacting your STATE INSURANCE COMMISSIONER (or State Insurance Department) and file a complaint against your insurance company.

Also consider doing some reading on insurance and "bad faith." A simple google search will bring up tons of information. If you are still angry when you're done researching and believe you have a claim against your insurance company--consider contacting a lawyer. I sense that you are experiencing extreme MENTAL ANGUISH over your insurance company's nonrenewal of your policy after 19 years of loyalty (and premium payments) on your part. Maybe that mental anguish ought to be compensated--and if so, maybe your insurance company will think twice before it labels others as "high risk" merely because they filed claims for storm damage.

Just offering some thoughts on the subject . . . consider what is useful and discard the rest. Forge forward!

Interesting Article
Here's an article I found:

One Claim Too Many?
Insurance's New Policy: Use It and Lose It

Andy and Robin Schneider had an unhappy surprise last Thanksgiving Day when a pipe burst in their Washington home while Robin was preparing their big turkey dinner. But the Schneiders got a worse surprise two months ago: State Farm Insurance, which had paid out $3,643 to repair the water damage to their $650,000 brick Colonial, informed the Schneiders it would not be renewing their homeowners insurance.

The reason: The Thanksgiving debacle was their second damage claim in two years. And in the 25 years they had been State Farm customers, the Schneiders had filed a total of three claims, one for a leak for which they were paid $278.

There was worse to come: When they applied to other insurers, they were turned down repeatedly, with insurers citing their claim history. . . .

"I think some of the things they're doing are really quite unfair," said Lawrence H. Mirel, D.C. commissioner of insurance and securities. "It seems to me that there should be some distinction made to claims due to someone's negligence and claims due to acts of God. If someone had bad luck and had a tree fall on the house, and had a burglary, neither of those are the person's fault."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A31208-2002Nov9?language=printer

Different countries, but the stories are all the same.

Re: Prohibited and Deceptive Insurance Practices
First off, welcome to A2K, Debra_Law.


Such a bad faith claim would be quickly thrown out of court. Any such "assurances" of continued coverage are, if anything, quasi-contractual in nature, and thus are neither binding nor enforceable, since they are not part of the contract.


No, the company is merely acting like any company acts in a free market system. The company's primary goal is to increase value for its shareholders. McGentrix represents a risk to that value. Thus, the company terminates its coverage. McGentrix, in common with most conservatives who place a great deal of faith in the inherent reasonableness of the free market system when it screws someone else, is indignant when it screws him. And so the world spins on.


In most states, a claim for mental anguish must be premised on "outrageous behavior" that "shocks the conscience." Cancelling a homeowner's policy, no matter how surprising or disappointing, hardly qualifies.