Minn. Supreme Court Rules Against Agent in Negligent Procurement Case

August 5, 2011

  • August 5, 2011 at 1:55 pm
    Compman says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    And the head purple people eater has spoken.

  • August 5, 2011 at 2:17 pm
    Don Moe says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Captive agent, that is in effect and employee of the company. No one mentions if the police officer could read. Just a thought.

    • August 5, 2011 at 2:30 pm
      Compman says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Don,

      We all know our clients can’t read and never remember telling us they want the cheapest policy and don’t care about coverage. Only when a claim comes to they automatically recall a conversation that never happened. That’s why we make all new business sign off on coverages before we issue the policy. Everything is documented. I had one guy who claimed he never requested his EQ be canceled and insisted that we did it without his knowledge and his claim would not be paid. He said he was getting an attorney and would take us to court. I asked him if he would like me to send over the signed and dated request he made to us to cancel the policy two years prior directly to his attorney. That shut him up.

  • August 5, 2011 at 2:22 pm
    blockbuster says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    At the present time Wisconsin requires carriers to include the coverage on the umbrella unless it is rejected in writing by the insured(s). I have not had ONE client keep it on the umbrella, due primarily to the high premium. I hope this Am Fam agent has good E&O protection.

  • August 5, 2011 at 2:37 pm
    blockbuster says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Best lesson here is “document, document, document”. Good documentation, as pointed out by Compman, will save your butt every time. Presently, in Wisconsin, carriers are required to include um and uim on the umbrella unless rejected in writing by the insured. I have not had ONE client keep the coverage on the umbrella due, primarily, to the cost. Why isn’t Am FAm defending this guy? Hope he has good E&O coverage.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*