Federal Judge in Mississippi 'Storm Surge' Case Upholds Home Insurance Flood Exclusion
National News • April 13, 2006
A federal judge in Mississippi has upheld the water damage exclusion in homeowners insurance policies in a ruling welcomed by insurers.
U.S. District Judge L.T. Senter, Jr. of the Southern ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: RE: Insurers and adjusters are playing with consumers.
Posted On: May 18, 2006, 9:57 pm CDT
Posted By: NKN
Comment:
ClaimHawk,
While your opinion is noted and quite appreciated, it would seem to me that you are the one who "fell down" on the job. You stated that you had a 3 week course that (to paraphrase) taught you the in's and out's of the policy. If it took you three weeks to learn this, then you should have been able to interpret the policy fairly clearly after this length of time.
Having said this, it would seem that there may be issues of "good faith" that can be raised with the company you were working for.
My question is, did the company you were being paid by (the independent adjusting firm) tell you to provide less coverage, or did the assigning company (the insurance company)? If it was the insurance company, why didn't you raise the topic at hand while you were working for them? It is rather easy to bad mouth someone when you will gain from it, rather then when they are signing your paycheck.
Seems kinda self-serving to me, but what do I know?
By the way, I am guessing that those who have posted on this thread will truly appreciate your apologizing for them to Mr. Poe. Especially now that you have no interest whatsoever on the fiduciary outcome of the claim (Di you mention, that you receive a portion of the claim amount from the insurance company? I believe 10% of what the insurance company pays to the Insured is due you under standard contract in Florida. Who is going to pay the additional 10% to get the work done?)?
Just random thoughts..........
Subject: RE: Insurers and adjusters are playing with consumers.
While your opinion is noted and quite appreciated, it would seem to me that you are the one who "fell down" on the job. You stated that you had a 3 week course that (to paraphrase) taught you the in's and out's of the policy. If it took you three weeks to learn this, then you should have been able to interpret the policy fairly clearly after this length of time.
Having said this, it would seem that there may be issues of "good faith" that can be raised with the company you were working for.
My question is, did the company you were being paid by (the independent adjusting firm) tell you to provide less coverage, or did the assigning company (the insurance company)? If it was the insurance company, why didn't you raise the topic at hand while you were working for them? It is rather easy to bad mouth someone when you will gain from it, rather then when they are signing your paycheck.
Seems kinda self-serving to me, but what do I know?
By the way, I am guessing that those who have posted on this thread will truly appreciate your apologizing for them to Mr. Poe. Especially now that you have no interest whatsoever on the fiduciary outcome of the claim (Di you mention, that you receive a portion of the claim amount from the insurance company? I believe 10% of what the insurance company pays to the Insured is due you under standard contract in Florida. Who is going to pay the additional 10% to get the work done?)?
Just random thoughts..........