|
Feedback ForumSend us your opinions, reactions, and ideas about "Home Insurance 9-1-1"Submissions for this question are no longer being accepted. Previously submitted comments appear below. Comments may have been edited for content or space. Poster: Robert Greene - TX Comment: Being an agent for one of the largest insurance companies in the US, this program was very interesting to me and quite alarming, as well. Knowing the ins and outs of policies, how they pay and what SHOULD be covered is the primary reason I typically have a harder time than most agents at selling insurance policies. I tell my clients and individuals to whom I give coverage quotes. “I do not quote for lowest rates. I quote for ADEQUATE coverage.” That is my job and responsibility to the client to tell them what they need. Unfortunately, many individuals do not take my recommendations for insuring adequately and have the attitude of, “It won’t happen to me,” or “I’ll just take my chances.” For years before I became involved in the insurance business, I too belived it to be a “scam.” Unfortunately, high insurance rates are a price to pay for having the RIGHT coverage. Just yesterday I had a client call to cancel because he found auto coverage for $10 less per month. After reviewing the quote he received it turns out they were not quoting uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage, which he did have with me. Being a buy on price shopper instead of thinking about what he was purchasing, he elected to stay with me, but still wanted to remove the UM/UIM from his policy against my recommendation. I had him sign the waiver form, but I cannot force him to keep the coverage. I have this battle every day with individuals who are not aware of what needs to be in place and why. Individuals should talk to their agent IN DETAIL about what they have and understand that even though they have “Insurance,” that coverage may not be what they thought it was. One more case was a client of mine that wanted to save money so they elected to remove the water endorsement from their home policy, again against my recommendation. This is the part that covers sudden and accidental discharge (pipe breaks, etc.) They had great luck for three years and during a party at their home, the toilet tank overflowed causing $8,200 in damage to their master bedroom floors, walls, etc. Over the 3 years they saved about $435. It cost them the full amount. I asked if they wished for me to add the endorsement back and they agreed. Of course the claim was not covered because the loss happened after they removed the endorsement. A dollar saved is not always the best route. You have to think of the possibilities and again, talk to your agent. I never insure homes to less than 100% reconstruction. I talk to contractors to see what the average homes are being built at on an individual basis on a $/ft2 so that I know what the home should be covered to. I have told quote callers and clients alike to get coverage elsewhere if they were not going to listen to me. I do not want an errors and omissions claim against my agency because a customer was not insured enough. If I tell you that you need $250,000 to rebuild your home. Why would you argue and elect to insure it only to $160,000? I could speak on this subject for hours, but remember, if you have a home policy that is $1,000 a year in force for 5 years and it paid $230,000 toward a $300,000 cost to rebuild, you got $225,000 for only $5,000. It’s still not a bad deal. The insurance world is not perfect, talk to your agent and make sure you invest the extra money to be 100% insured. Poster: Comment: Hmm.. Very interesting comments about a program that speaks about bad behavior in the insurance industry. All of us are policyholders and have entered into a legal contract with an entity that is governed quite closely by each and every state we reside in. The reason for that governance is that those respective states request the assistance of insurers to transfer their respective risks and to maintain certain levels of cash to pay in the event of a catastrophe. We as a country can choose to self-insure by paying for our properties out of our savings and by maintaining enough additional cash to replace it should a catastrophe present itself. The vast majority of people are not in a position to self-insure thus insurance companies exist to bear the risk. It bears noting that one criteria between all established countires and their wealth is that insurance plays a critical role. As for profits of insurance companies, some companies are mutual and owned by their policyholders. It is bewildering to think that some insurers involved in the handling of Katrina have paid in excess of 95% of their claims. Be careful what you wish for, most states that have, in one manner or another chose to self-insure, have had results that send them and their cofers racing back to insurers. Poster: Gill Fin Comment: Thanks for the one sided program which didn't teach viewers anything about how to avoid the problem of underinsured homes, or anything relevant that viewers could use to help them understand insurance at all. No mention of relative facts such as 1) insurance premiums are set by state commissioners 2) insureds got what they paid for, no more and no less 3) policyholders have duty to review their policies each year at renewal when they receive their declarations page so they can 4) contact their insurers to make any necessary changes. Why not mention that one reason this problem exists to the extent that it does is that many policyholders now buy insurance over the phone or online. Small wonder they don't know what they bought, and don't know they too have a duty to contact their insurer to rectify any errors in their policy. Agents have every reason to sell the correct amount of insurance, not less, because they work on commission. Policyholders only want the cheapest coverage at the cheapest price. Weren't the contracts struck between insureds and insurers honored? If you bought half of what you need you shouldnt be complaining after the fact that you only got half of what you need. You picked State Farm and Allstate because they are the biggest but failed to mention the high customer satisfaction ratings of both companies, even though that information is available from consumer reports and state insurance commissioner data all over the country. After reading the posts here there is no doubt your one sided report only creates a bigger problem of misinformation. Poster: Tom Comment: This is some of the worst jouralism I've ever seen on PBS. No facts are presented to back up the allegations made agaisnt insurance companies, simply sound bites alleging unethical practices from those critical of the industry. The report exposed nothing, and was just alarmist. Why? Poster: Steve Comment: Having read through many of the postings here, I see that there are a number of perspectives - insurance company employees, policyholders who have had bad experiences, other consumers who are not sure what to think. I am a lawyer who represents individuals who have claims with their own insurance companies. The insurance companies in each case have denied what appear to me and to my clients to be legitimate claims within the policy limits. No matter how obediant my clients seem to be with the terms of their policy, the insurance companies always operate from a position of skeptisism and suspicion. Every claim is scrutinized well beyond reason and every claim is either denied or offerred much less than it is worth. I have found that most employees of insurance companies are very good to work with - until the claim reaches the point where a senior manager or executive becomes involved. Then the fight begins. And unless the policy holder fights back with the same or more force, the company will not pay. I think there are many claims that are paid fairly and promptly. I also know that there are many that are not, because I see them every day. The advice that NOW gives with respect to reviewing your policy and making sure that you have adequate coverage is essential. Hopefully you never have to use it, but if you do, make sure that you have much more coverage than the minimum. Ultimately, what our country needs is more transparency with respect to insurance regulation. I'm not a fan of the government sticking its nose where it doesn't need to be, but insurance is not a want anymore - its a need and comodities like insurance should be scrutinized as closely as a utility. The law requires that we have auto insurance, yet it allows the auto insurance companies to determine what they will cover and when. That's not insurance - it's a gamble. Poster: Elizabeth Comment: Thank you for your efforts in bringing this report out into the open for all consumers to see. While Insurers are recognizing record-breaking profits, they are also actively engaged in shorting claims payments to insured. In 2004. Allstate's Edward Liddy's compensation was $30.4 MILLION DOLLARS! Liddy ranked #16 among the 100 highest paid CEOs. Enough is enough! People need to wake up and realize what insurers obligations are to them. And it is NOT to recognize record breaking profits while paying their CEO tens of millions of dollars in a single year. Poster: Mike Fernandez Comment: As a representative of State Farm, I am extremely disappointment with PBS, and the content and questionable reporting methods used in, “Home Insurance 9-1-1” (Now, Aug. 17, 2007). As the nation’s leading personal lines insurer, we are committed to serving the needs of our tens of millions of customers – fairly, promptly and efficiently. Contrary to your report, real data and overall customer experience support our position. Both the Now report and the Bloomberg magazine article from which PBS admits it derived most of its program conten present many inaccuracies and selective use of facts. Now begins with a pledge to look into these “controversial practices widespread” in the insurance industry. The term “widespread” in the above context is supported by nothing more than anecdotes and a handful of lawsuits. We invite readers to visit www.statefarm.com (About>Media) to learn much more details about the extreme journalistic deficiencies in both the Bloomberg article and the follow up Now PBS program. We sincerely hope any future PBS coverage of State Farm and the insurance industry provides much clearer context, understanding, and full disclosure. Insurers come to the aid of hundreds of millions of policyholders every year. A trial bar-peddled handful of recycled anecdotes and lawsuits should not, and do not, tell your viewers the true story. Mike Fernandez Vice President - Public Affairs State Farm Insurance Poster: Sarah Comment: Homeownership insurance policies for co-ops in NY are very similar to renters insurance. If the building should suffer substanial damage, not just your apartment, how are you protected? The contents of your home may be covered, but is the value of your home covered? Poster: Earl Gipson Comment: The United States is beginning to look like one giant scam with the complicity of government. Insurance, health care, drug industry, everything. seems to be awry. We do not need terrorists, the country is being torn apart and dismantled by the corporations and our very own government. Poster: Ronda Comment: The Auto Ins industry is the same. They will do everything they can to low ball and stall payment. Thank you for your timely piece, I now know I will not be chosing State Farm or Allstate for my homeowners policy on my new house. I will be researching ins. companys from now on Poster: Nancy R. Crafton Comment: So revealing and important to Citizens! We've allowed a terrible corporate genre to become God to America...profit at any cost! how very sad! Poster: juanita cooper Comment: I think that the insurance companies should be made to pay out of their pocket for this type of action tward the people.and I also think they should lose their jobs. Still all they will do is take the money from the ones that is still paying for their insurance and fight the one's that have paid to keep from paying then for their claims. Poster: Kim Forbes-Gayton Comment: I watched in horror and feel very deeply for the homeowners who were assured that they would be made whole by their insurance companies only to find that they were in fact low-balled or faced boxing gloves. The reports got my attention and I am sending copies to my insurance company. I WANT to know before disaster strikes! Thank you NOW ... and please, keep us posted on the homeowner's progress. Poster: JACK WARREN Comment: Your home insurance expose' was terrific! Hard, inside facts so vital to informed consumer action to protect -for most - their greatest lifetime investment. This report is precisely why I continually watch PBS for my first choice in honest, even handed news. None better! Poster: Bob Hughes Comment: I happen to be employed in the property & casualty industry in the state of Florida, and I watched your program with great interest and read the Bloomberg article very carefully. I do not work on the claims side of the business, nor do I deal with homeowner policies, but I'm familiar with these issues, especially in a disaster prone state. I am not a spokesman for the insurance industry, nor for any particular company; my comments are solely my own. Neither the program nor the article made clear whether or not the homeowners had purchased adequate coverage limits in the first place. Some comments led me to believe that this was part of the problem. Insurance agents are typically paid on commissions for policies they sell. Homeowners typically make buying decisions based on the cost of the premiums. This creates an incentive to keep the coverage amount low, sometimes lower than the cost to replace a house. The average customer does not know how to accurately appraise the replacement cost of a house, but neither does the average insurance agent. It is extremely rare for an insurance buyer to pay for a building contractor or appraiser to determine an adequate coverage amount. There is also another important coverage factor in many states. In Florida, for example, there have been significant changes to building codes in the past 15 years since Hurricane Andrew. If an older house is destroyed, the replacement cost feature pays for the house as it was at the time of the loss, but it does not pay for the additional costs associated with newer building codes. This includes things such as stronger doors and windows, better trusses and roof decking, and connections from the foundation through the walls to the roof. Many companies offer coverage for these additional costs by adding an endorsement. It is not a well understood coverage, and it also adds to the premium cost, but it is important and often neglected. It is important to recognize that much of the problems occur long before the homeowner has a loss. The program and article do point to some corporate decisions and claim practices that are clearly wrong. I can't comment directly on those matters because they are outside my area of involvement. However, I do not condone or excuse treatment of policyholders that is not completely fair and transparent. Poster: Helen Palisin Comment: Thank you. I do wish there was a way to know which insurers did pay claims in full. Perhaps a table with number of claims, and satisfaction. I printed Hunter's advice and will review my policies. I have a feeling it's a crap shoot though. At least I'll be realistic about expectations despite my company's reassuring ads. Poster: David Comment: Citizens Property Insurance Company pull the same heavy handed tactics to deny valid claims here in Southwest Florida after the hurricanes in 2004 amd 2005. What is unfortunate is that, now that these unscroupulous companiew and their shenanigans have been exposed, there doesn't seem to be anything being done about it. Letters to the Florida Governor, Lt Governor, state Representative, US Senators, Chief Financial Officer, Office of Insurance Regulation, and others just fall on hollow bureauocratic ears with no action being taken. Lord help us! Poster: Mona Yount Comment: After 35 years with declining coverage and higher premiums, I recently changed my insurance from State Farm. I can relate to the Katrina victims as I also had a claim that was cut off and not completely paid under a renter's policy several years ago. Due to health problems in addition to the need to find a home due to a storm, I did not pursue any additional recovery from the policy. I certainly believe additional regulations are needed, along with government agencies to oversee the actions and attitudes of insurance companies and fines that will hit their pocketbooks when they do not practice with ethics and honesty. Poster: D.L.Kellner Comment: I watched the show on KCPT.The show was very alarming to me it shows how big business is running over everything and everyone to include the state governments.Maybe you should show how the insurance companies got the power to be able to do this dastardly deeds? Poster: jeanette avila Comment: We where going to buy home owners insurence and decided not to. After see what they did to all them people I decided not to. The rich are geting richer and the poor, poorer and know one really cares. They won't even raise the minum wage how are people supose to live. There is stavashin here in amercia and people are dieing. In Iraq for what they don't care as they are heartless and just don't. We the poor will never get justice we don't have a voice even if we vote. Poster: JanetCruz Comment: This agrees with my families experience after our house burned in Washington state. State farm demanded that the house must be built to the original plans, and it took three years and a lawsuit which drug on and on with many insurance caused delays, to finally get a settlement, becuase the original plans had been destroyed. Poster: Kaptainess Comment: Thank You PBS, NOW and Bill Moyers for giving the American Public real news to help them. I see more clearly why people support PBS and plan on giving more. PBS is a service to America! Poster: Kaptainess Comment: I never liked insurance, either it be life, car or home insurance. I bought a 35,000. car cash to avoid paying high car insurance. I saved over 3,000. a year for five years until my first accident. Needless to say, I fixed my car with cash and still had 13,000. in my pocket. Life insurance is a fraud, all one has to do is to have burial fees. What else does one need to leave after one is gone? Save the dough in a bank or invest the money, you will get better returns. This will set the insurance industry on its ear! They are cheaters! Poster: Jerry R Comment: Ok I was believing you on the insurance business. Until I heard some strange numbers. You said State Farm made 67 billion last year. Then a few minutes later you said the 60 million homeowners pay 43 billion a year to the entire industry. So where does the magic 24 billion come from? By the way I have a friend who lost his house during hurricane Andrew. And his house was completely rebuilt. Nothing out of his pocket. Poster: Bob Comment: Your program was totally skewed. You found one or two unhappy people plus some lawyers and politians who have everything to gain by bashing the insurance industry and make a story of it. The truth is that the property/casualty insurance industry has made an underwriting profit, that is, collected more in premiums that what was paid out in claims and expenses, only twice in the last 25 or so years. The industry's return on equity is actually much lower than the risk it presents. Further, much of the industry is NOT PUBLICLY OWNED but owned by the policyholders (such as mutuals). Finally, the vast majority of insurance professionals and companies take great pride in their integrity and strive to treat every policyholder and claimant fairly. Poster: Michelle in New York Comment: This show was informative and sadly very accurate. I can personally attest to most, if not all of the tactics mentioned in the program. Like the residents of California, I also suffered a loss through a fire in October 2003. Although my fire was on the opposite side of the country, I shared the same experiences as the California homeowners as I dealt with filing a claim with my insurance company. It seems as if every tactic mentioned on your program and in your online article was used during my year long battle with first Prudential and then Liberty Mutual (I was told that Prudential sold their homeowners division during the claim.) I can only wish those that are still fighting luck as I don't hold out any hope for a change in laws, or practices. Poster: Ted King Comment: This a terribly important story that needs told again and again. But what cn we do.... that is the next segment for this producer to work on. I will also. Thank you for great work. Ted King Poster: Kathy B. Comment: Scary program! We just received notice that our renewal premium will be LESS that last year. Can't wait to see how/if they have lowered the coverage. Poster: Ben Farrow-Taos, NM Comment: This show did it. My blood is boiling. Poster: Gordon Comment: Good job! Ultimately the companies that are treating their customers poorly will lose customers and provide a poor return to investors . Your work is helpful in exposing what is going on so that customers can make informed decesions. Poster: Rick Lee Comment: Large business entities in the States today are very sophisticated and unfortunately sometimes this creates confusion and harm to consumers who do not realise this. Where there is more money is at stake, the more savvy and informed a consumer must be. Insurance companies do not modify a policy unilaterally without notice to the consumer, but nor do they provide notice with red flashing lights. The consumer is always informed of policy changes via a paper insert included with the bill. It may be that the method of providing notice, and the language used, could be in a manner more easily understood by consumers. The program does illustrate an interesting issue that consumers may not even be conscious of: making the payment means the consumer accepts the policy changes. The implication is that the consumer has accepted what is usually less coverage (increased policy exclusions) for the billed amount (approximately the same premium cost). Paying the same money for less coverage. This may have been way that a homeowner who originally purchased a policy for 'full replacement value' wound up with lesser coverage at the time of property loss. It may be that insurance companies today are boosting their profits by engaging in oppressive tactics and taking advantage of their stronger bargaining position with non-negotiable practices. Corporations must balance the interests of its employees, its shareholders and its customers. It may be that insurance companies today are favoring the first two at expense of the last (zero sum game). The apparent surge and severity of recent disasters (Florida and Gulf state hurricanes, Western wildfires, California earthquakes, Texas and Midwestern flooding) - and the resulting property loss - provides a stark contrast when juxtaposed against record industry profits. $47 billion speaks for itself. A final note: the homeowners featured in the program appear to live in an area at higher risk to wildfires than the average San Diego metro subdivision. The California wildfire featured in the program occurred in an area not densely populated. Southern California is naturally a chaparral desert and would be today if not for man-made irrigation efforts. Every summer, wild plants naturally turn to brown, dry kindling. A $500K house in such an area is at a higher risk to wildfire than a typical subdivision in metro San Diego. Presumably this higher risk is reflected either in their insurance policies, the premiums, or both. Your program airs as my auto and homeowners policies are due for renewal and will be on my mind as I mail the check. Poster: James Jordan Comment: I have experienced similar deception when Farm Bureau would not pay for my tractor that was totaled. I requested full coverage and my agent assured me I had it. The loop hole was it was being towed to another farming location.--a daily occurrence in farming. WHAT I WANT TO KNOW -- THE NAMES OF THE INSURANCE COMPANIES THAT DID PAY. RECOGNIZE THE GOOD GUYS!! Poster: Tony Oliveira Comment: My wife and I have been life long residence of Massachusetts that in my opinion is a state that has always been in the pockets of the insurance company’s. I found your report concerning the insurance companies most interesting and extremely upsetting. How can this go on with these company's ripping off the American public? I for one have been canceled three times and now have no choice but to go with the Mass Fair plan at three times the cost with less coverage and higher deductibles and in my thirty - four years owning my home have never had a claim. I was amazed at the profits these company’s are reaping and wonder how much more these company’s can go on taking advantage of all of us. You may think that our honorable elected officials would do something to straighten out this mess but again I feel they’ve all been bought and paid for. Thank you for bringing this report out and hopefully something will come of it. Tony Oliveira Poster: Aurora E. Hunter Comment: The starting point in addressing the ills of the United States is, I believe, to ascertain why the American people have allowed our government to permit business fraud of all kinds to exist, proliferate, and be financially rewarding to bussinesses, all the while accepting fraud as the natural and efficient way of doing business. That answer will show how to procede with responding to said ills, even if the answer is that the present low level of integrity is what the people want. Poster: Comment: Ifound your program a total farce with no regard for what the real truth is. When you do a story it would be important to find out what really changed the industry after the earthquake in california. The policy was a guaranteed replacement cost policy which meant the company guaranteed to replace the home for whatever it took to replace even if it was more than the polciy limit. You seem to have not mentioned in your story that a majority of the california homeowners were carrying a $100,000 limit on their home for building coverage and paying for a premium on a $100,000 home. When the earthquake hit now the homeowners have total losses and to replace their home it would cost $500,000 and we honored those claims. The problem is that the homes should of been insured to what the true replacemnt cost was that way there would be enough money to pay for these losses. The increased dwelling coverage comes into play when the home is really being insured at the proper amount 100% replacement cost and it now has an additional 20% buffer. It really is up to the client to make sure that the house is covered at the proper amount. the agent should give guidance and work with the homeowner so that there is enough coverage to put the person back to what they had before theloss. As far as garamendi stating companies decrees are to not pay claims or to delay claims is total bull. I have always been a big supporter of PBS but this program has disgusted me so much you will never see another contribution from me. |
Who's Helping Our Wounded Vets?
Elizabeth Warren on the Economy
Nurses Needed
Electric Car Dreams
PBS Special Report: Health Care Reform
