20+ Year Commercial Transportation Underwriter says:
Like or Dislike:
6
0
Insurance Companies can and do put pressure on unsafe operations by refusing to offer coverage, or thru adverse pricing actions. But it has never been up to the insurance industry to decide what motor carriers are deemed fit to navigate on US Highways. That’s the job of the FMCSA. The NTSB’s implications that the insurance industry should manage unsafe motor carriers is misguided — they need to give the FMCSA more power to act. In fact the FAST Act is a step in the opposite direction by removing carrier safety scores from public view (with “public” including the insurance industry). Our industry has less data with which to make decisions about a carrier’s safety performance as a result of FAST. And another issue facing the insurance industry is a complex web of state regulations where insurers are often prohibited from cancelling coverage and / or increasing price. State Insurance Departments and the Fast Act both often render the insurance industry impotent in making these decisions. The burden is on the FMCSA to determine what carriers should be allowed to navigate public roadways, and legislatures need to empower the FMCSA to make those decisions, not yield to political pressures from special interest groups to remove safety scores from public view and force insurer’s to remain on underperforming risks.
And there always seems to be another insurance carrier around the corner willing to write without due diligence. So the motor carrier loses coverages, places with another insurance carrier, and is back in business.
Problem solved – for the motor carrier and no one else!
Insurance Companies can and do put pressure on unsafe operations by refusing to offer coverage, or thru adverse pricing actions. But it has never been up to the insurance industry to decide what motor carriers are deemed fit to navigate on US Highways. That’s the job of the FMCSA. The NTSB’s implications that the insurance industry should manage unsafe motor carriers is misguided — they need to give the FMCSA more power to act. In fact the FAST Act is a step in the opposite direction by removing carrier safety scores from public view (with “public” including the insurance industry). Our industry has less data with which to make decisions about a carrier’s safety performance as a result of FAST. And another issue facing the insurance industry is a complex web of state regulations where insurers are often prohibited from cancelling coverage and / or increasing price. State Insurance Departments and the Fast Act both often render the insurance industry impotent in making these decisions. The burden is on the FMCSA to determine what carriers should be allowed to navigate public roadways, and legislatures need to empower the FMCSA to make those decisions, not yield to political pressures from special interest groups to remove safety scores from public view and force insurer’s to remain on underperforming risks.
And there always seems to be another insurance carrier around the corner willing to write without due diligence. So the motor carrier loses coverages, places with another insurance carrier, and is back in business.
Problem solved – for the motor carrier and no one else!