Posted On: January 23, 2006, 4:07 pm CST

Posted By: Chris

While such an "informed rejection" form would help educate consumers, and maybe keep honest people honest, it still won't stop plaintiff lawyers, and attorneys general with higher office ambitions, from alleging that the flood exclusion is "vague" or that a "hurricane policy" means flood due to wind-driven surge.

What the state really needs is a law that says that policy wordings, and their intent, on file with the DOI that have been approved by the DOI cannot be challenged as to their meaning or intent. The plaintiffs would/could only allege, and prove, that the insurer affirmatively committed fraud in the sale of the policy.