Posted On: August 17, 2006, 10:33 am CDT

Posted By: Jacqueline

I am in my second year in business as an independent agent who started her "scratch" agency from scratch - literally. I offer property and auto insurance by carriers with whom I have direct appointment and also workers comp as a sub-broker. Since I received my first appointment my my first carrier, I have gotten 5 requests for quotes for flood insurance from homeowners referred to me through the flood insurance program. All 5 of these homeowners were well-heeled and owned homes in the middle class to affluent areas. The time I took to process the flood quotes plus the postage to mail them the copies of these quotes was all time and money out of my pocket so essentially that was work that I did for free because not a single one of the 5 bought any flood coverage! After doing follow-up phone calls to these people, they ALL rank and file said basically the same thing, "If the lender doesn't require it and we've never had a flood or an earthquake so I can't see spending the money for it." So basically, those that can afford a nice home in the nicer areas of Erie and its surrounding suburbs, are too damn cheap and greedy to part with a dime to buy any additional coverage at all and what coverage they DO purchase, they wast so many agents' time with their "rate shopping" crap I feel like just throwing them the hell out of my office. When I explain someone's HO or Dwelling policy to them and advise that they can buy an additional rider to cover more than what the standard Contents provision will cover, they decline it because they want it for free and are not willing to pay for it. So if they have a loss that they feel should be covered to their expectations or liking, it's never their fault for being too cheap to buy the coverage - it's gotta be someone else's fault. Since their time is always more important than commission-only paid agent who offers them the policies, they can't be bothered to come in to the agent's office and go over their policy with the agent - you know, that legal document that they "don't have time" to read - that is somehow the agent's fault or the carrier's fault? Then there's the people who think that the contents coverage should entitle them to replace ALL their furniture at the most expensive furniture store in town because they think of insurance as " The Principle of Enrichment", and NOT as "The Principle of Indemnification" and they do nothing but waste the agent's time - which the agent is NOT paid for - by b*tching at the agent that they pay premiums so that they can be made better or made new, not made whole, as if it's the agent's fault that the carriers offer their respective specified coverages which is not designed to enrich them. Then there's my favorite: the non-profits who pay for car insurance for the first six months for welfare mothers for whom welfare is buying their cars for them, going through job readiness training and job placement through PA's SPOC Program. These agencies will only provide this "help" with the car insurance that the welfare mothers can't afford on their own if their program participants get a written quote that is for Liability Only WITHOUT UM/UIM at the sate minimum liability limits of 15/30/5 with $5000 min for 1st party medical. When I questioned them on ther quote request requirements, I was told, "Well as a non-profit, we have our guidelines. The quote we must have in writing must only be for what is mandatory to be legal and UM/UIM is not mandatory to be legal." Of course, these welfare mothers who are not paying for their cars OR the insurance do not want any coverage that is not totally paid for by these agencies. If the agent refuses to even quote such a ridiculous policy, then the agent is the heavy for "looking down on welfare mothers and not serving them because they're too poor to pay for this additional $13-$17 worth of premium for UM/UIM ". Of course, they're not too poor to buy their offspring expensive clothes and $180 sneakers or X-Boxes and Play Stations - something I couldn't afford myself as someone busting her *** to make a living as a self-employed independent P & C agent. I think that UM/UIM ought to be mandatory and I think that affluent homeowners who are too cheap and greedy to spend the extra $300-$1000 for adequate flood & earthquake insurance should be denied home equity loans, second mortgages or even the first mortgage to buy their homes to begin with. We may not be able to protect people from their own stupidity but we as agents should certainly should be able to protect ourselves from the stupidity of others by lobying lawmakers to make the purchase of flood and earthquake coverage madatory in addition to dwelling and Ho policies for homeowners and the same goes for UM/UIM, too! I am sick of seeing other hardworking agents get unjustly sued and blamed for the cheapness and stupiodity of others who refuse to take responsibility for their choices.