Moff Rimmer
|
I was looking to switch homeowner's insurance from company A to company B. B needed a form from A listing claims and showing that I wasn't paid on one of them. In ten years, I've had two claims.
1 was in 2009 -- people broke into our car (smashing the window) and stole two cameras. Hoping I might be able to get something back, I asked if the homeowner's insurance would cover the items stolen. They eventually said that they would cover $40 so I said "forget it".
The other claim was recently for a new roof.
Company B said that they won't cover me because I've had two claims in the past three years. Ok, kind of -- I mean, I wasn't paid a single dime on one of the claims.
So, from my point of view, my car got broken into, I lost my cameras, got buttkis from the insurance company -- AND still got penalized further just because I asked the question to my insurance company.
How in the world does this make any sense at all?
| BigNorseWolf |
How in the world does this make any sense at all?
You're not someone who will silently keep paying and paying and never ask for services in return.
In other words you're not the kind of person the insurance companies are looking for.
You also need to remember that you're dealing with a low level functionary carrying out some very rigid rules lain down by the higher ups. While they probably made sense to the hire up given a proper amount of discretion, exercising any of that discretion will get the low level functionary fired.
| Bill Lumberg |
You had two losses. Even though you did not pursue a claim for the damage to your car the event still took place. The company that you applied to for a policy does not care whether your current carrier paid out or not, they only care about the frequency of losses/events within a given period of time. They use this information to assess what kind of risk there is of you suffering other losses.
The matter of risk is not solely dependent on you and your history of claims. They will assess the rate of vandalism, break-ins, weather-related damage and so forth in your area. These all count towards estimating the chance of something happening in the area that you live in. It does not matter that burglars have not broken into your home while they prey on other houses in the neighborhood. The fact that they are doing so in the area increases the liklihood of your house eventually becoming a target.
There are probably other additional factors in your area that made them unwilling to write you a policy.
| Moro |
You had two losses. Even though you did not pursue a claim for the damage to your car the event still took place. The company that you applied to for a policy does not care whether your current carrier paid out or not, they only care about the frequency of losses/events within a given period of time. They use this information to assess what kind of risk there is of you suffering other losses.
The matter of risk is not solely dependent on you and your history of claims. They will assess the rate of vandalism, break-ins, weather-related damage and so forth in your area. These all count towards estimating the chance of something happening in the area that you live in. It does not matter that burglars have not broken into your home while they prey on other houses in the neighborhood. The fact that they are doing so in the area increases the liklihood of your house eventually becoming a target.
There are probably other additional factors in your area that made them unwilling to write you a policy.
No additional other factors at all whatsoever are necessary. They simply dislike the fact that you appear to be a person who would actually try to USE their insurance for it's supposedly intended purpose.
What they forgot to tell you is that insurance is a giant scam in which you are supposed to continuously hand a company money and never expect anything in return, and the moment you do, they will retaliate and either drop you altogether or raise your rates. Of course, it is illegal in some areas for them to retaliate by raising your rate after a claim, but they have a laundry list of standard excuses that they print on the paperwork instead.
Insurance = scam. Especially any insurances you are required to carry, whether it be by the state or bank or what have you. Monetarily you will almost always come out ahead by sticking the amount you would have paid for insurance and sticking it into a bank account, and then only drawing on that account if you need to repair or replace something.
Almost the only time homeowners insurance wins out is in the event of a natural disaster or fire, but good luck finding a way to pay for that coverage only.
| estergum |
Insurance = scam. Especially any insurances you are required to carry, whether it be by the state or bank or what have you. Monetarily you will almost always come out ahead by sticking the amount you would have paid for insurance and sticking it into a bank account, and then only drawing on that account if you need to repair or replace...
No, Insurance is just about managing risk.
You're required to get insurance by your bank as they are managing their risk in case something happens to their collateral (your house).
As stated you will almost always come out ahead if you just bank your premiums but that is usually based on not experiencing a major event.
So you have to ask your self what is the risk and impact is a major event happens, or a moderate event happens before you have accumulated enough cash?
If you can handled it put your money in a bank, if the risk or consequence to too high get insurance.
Robert Hawkshaw
|
The insurance biz in a nutshell:
BASIC MUD -
Big enough book of business (appropriate statistical spread),
Adverse Selection minimized through good knowledge of each risk,
Sustainable over a number of years - so you can spread risk over time and build up reserves
Information readily available from reliable sources about hazard, vulnerability, exposure and claims - from actuaries and underwriters
Consistent with existing insurance practices, systems, customs and law
Moral Hazard being low and manageable
Uncertainty about the potential loss with at least one of the following being uncertain - will the loss occur, when will it occur, how much will it cost
Demand for insurance or potential for that demand to be created (enough customers)
You are probably falling into the adverse selection bit. Avoiding high risk individuals or areas. I don't know much about the american insurance companies but I imagine they are pretty risk adverse right now with the kicking the economy has taken and the amount of defaults etc...
Does your local credit union offer home insurance?
| Onyewu |
I currently work in property and casualty insurance. This is a bit of my experience.
Insurance is for CATASTROPHIC losses. Small claims are often considered to be nuisance issues to the insurance company. Statistically someone who has filed one claim will file another so when companies review your recent claim history, these multiple claims can hurt you. It doesn't matter if they were paid or not--you appear to be someone who will file claims and eventually cost the company money.
The best way to avoid such issues is to avoid filing very small dollar claims if you can help it and develop a relationship with your agent. They can often advise you whether or not it would be a covered loss and let you know if filing a claim would be your best option. See if you can do an inquiry only and then make a decision as to whether or not you want to file.
Hope this helps a bit. Insurance is not what we all want it to be.
| estergum |
Hope this helps a bit. Insurance is not what we all want it to be.
And don't forget their primary roll is to make money for the shareholders,
which means, yes the house always wins.Until there is a major catastrophic loss and they have to pay out huge amounts.
As happened here in NZ with the Christchurch earthquake a number of smaller and one large insurance company when to the wall because they didn't carry enough re-insurance (when insurers insure against large payouts)
It was election year so the Govt picked up the tab for domestic losses, and to be fair probably would have any way.
| Moro |
I currently work in property and casualty insurance. This is a bit of my experience.
Insurance is for CATASTROPHIC losses. Small claims are often considered to be nuisance issues to the insurance company. Statistically someone who has filed one claim will file another so when companies review your recent claim history, these multiple claims can hurt you. It doesn't matter if they were paid or not--you appear to be someone who will file claims and eventually cost the company money.The best way to avoid such issues is to avoid filing very small dollar claims if you can help it and develop a relationship with your agent. They can often advise you whether or not it would be a covered loss and let you know if filing a claim would be your best option. See if you can do an inquiry only and then make a decision as to whether or not you want to file.
Hope this helps a bit. Insurance is not what we all want it to be.
Sorry, but I read this as "We claim to insure you against all of the potential losses covered in the policy you purchase, but really we do not expect you to ever use this service unless the s&*! hits the fan. By the way, we will not offer you an 'only when the s+~# hits the fan policy' for a lesser cost. So please remember, make your payments on time but never, ever, every expect to get any of it back. We expect YOU to abide by the terms of the policy agreement, but you are b#$!+~~ insane if you think we have any intention of holding up our end of the bargain. If you appear to be somebody who actually expects to get what you pay for, we will drop you faster than an NYPD officer drops an OWS protestor."