Katrina at Two Years: $40.6 Billion Paid on 1.7 Million Insurance Claims
National News • August 7, 2007
Two years later, the "overwhelming majority of claims" in Gulf Coast states from Hurricane Katrina have been settled in what has been the single largest loss — $40.6 billion — in the history of ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: Glad for concurrent causation
Posted On: August 8, 2007, 2:34 pm CDT
Posted By: State Farm Policyholder
Comment:
As a State Farm policyholder/owner, I am glad that they had the integrity to deny claims relating to their concurrent causation clause...i.e. living by the terms of their policy and not bowing to emotional appeal/slander of Scruggs group.
I know what my policy covers and what it doesn't. I don't want my rates going up because some two-bit judge decides that the policy should cover things that were not intended to be covered and were not rated for in the premium calculations.
Most exclusions in a policy are there for specific reasons, either the coverage is better provided for elsewhere (NFIP for example)or because the cost of including coverage for that issue would be cost prohibititive. The concurrent causation clause exists to eliminate the gray area between a covered event & a non-covered event. Explain to me exactly how an adjuster is supposed to be able to determine the correct indemnification of the wind portion of a slab claim. Explain how the actuaries are supposed to include that data into the rate calculations.
Subject: Glad for concurrent causation
I know what my policy covers and what it doesn't. I don't want my rates going up because some two-bit judge decides that the policy should cover things that were not intended to be covered and were not rated for in the premium calculations.
Most exclusions in a policy are there for specific reasons, either the coverage is better provided for elsewhere (NFIP for example)or because the cost of including coverage for that issue would be cost prohibititive. The concurrent causation clause exists to eliminate the gray area between a covered event & a non-covered event. Explain to me exactly how an adjuster is supposed to be able to determine the correct indemnification of the wind portion of a slab claim. Explain how the actuaries are supposed to include that data into the rate calculations.