It would be a better story if we put pressure on the regulatory authority to NOT allow insurance companies to hit you with a claim when NO money is paid out… A claim does not derive when no money is put forth.. This is common sense and the law needs to be enforced.
Marty, I am curious as to the law you are referring to.
Also, doesn’t it make sense to “hit [them] with a claim” when losses fall below deductibles? If someone has 5 car accidents in a year all below their deductible, it still increases the likelihood that they will have a loss that, eventually, exceeds it.
That’s a nice thought Marty, but we’d have to figure out a way to split up the “no coverage” claims from other types of claims without payouts which should definitely impact rates, such as denials due to customer fraud, intentional acts or misrepresentation.
It’s definitely a tough conversation trying to explain to someone why your rates could go up even if you got rear-ended in your car while stopped at a red light when the carrier didn’t pay out anything. As Counterpoint correctly pointed out – a high loss frequency, regardless of amounts paid, is normally an indicator that the policyholder has a higher likelihood of being involved in future losses.
Carriers require prompt notice of a loss to ensure they get a chance to investigate the actual loss cause, if there’s coverage and to what extent damages occurred. If you don’t report a loss to your carrier, fix everything on your own, then file a claim hoping it’ll be covered, the carrier may deny your claim for lack of sufficient notice if you do not have ‘all your ducks in a row’ (e.g. photographs, invoices, assessor’s report, etc.)
Since I am unfamiliar with hurricane insurance, I am wondering what impact reporting smaller, below deductible claims would have on claims adjustment calculations. Would it lower or raise the claims based on the tools used by adjusters and applied by carriers?
Filing a claim that is an “Act of God” such as Hurricane or lightning does not ‘count against’ the customer like on an auto policy if you have a NAF accident. So that is why saying better to report the claim even if minor. There are cases where ‘minor’ damage turns out to be something much more. Better to report it in a timely manner than to have it declined for not reporting. That is what is meant by harm in not reporting vs reporting. Also with Hurricane coverage in Florida there is a calendar year deductible that could come in to play if another storm hits area within the same calendar year and since 2 more months of hurricane season you never know how it will all turn out. a lot of companies have changed their “duties after a loss” so clients should follow the guidelines of their company.
It would be a better story if we put pressure on the regulatory authority to NOT allow insurance companies to hit you with a claim when NO money is paid out… A claim does not derive when no money is put forth.. This is common sense and the law needs to be enforced.
Marty, I am curious as to the law you are referring to.
Also, doesn’t it make sense to “hit [them] with a claim” when losses fall below deductibles? If someone has 5 car accidents in a year all below their deductible, it still increases the likelihood that they will have a loss that, eventually, exceeds it.
That’s a nice thought Marty, but we’d have to figure out a way to split up the “no coverage” claims from other types of claims without payouts which should definitely impact rates, such as denials due to customer fraud, intentional acts or misrepresentation.
It’s definitely a tough conversation trying to explain to someone why your rates could go up even if you got rear-ended in your car while stopped at a red light when the carrier didn’t pay out anything. As Counterpoint correctly pointed out – a high loss frequency, regardless of amounts paid, is normally an indicator that the policyholder has a higher likelihood of being involved in future losses.
This doesn’t make sense: “the potential harm of not reporting a claim far outweighs the potential of not doing so.”
Carriers require prompt notice of a loss to ensure they get a chance to investigate the actual loss cause, if there’s coverage and to what extent damages occurred. If you don’t report a loss to your carrier, fix everything on your own, then file a claim hoping it’ll be covered, the carrier may deny your claim for lack of sufficient notice if you do not have ‘all your ducks in a row’ (e.g. photographs, invoices, assessor’s report, etc.)
Since I am unfamiliar with hurricane insurance, I am wondering what impact reporting smaller, below deductible claims would have on claims adjustment calculations. Would it lower or raise the claims based on the tools used by adjusters and applied by carriers?
Filing a claim that is an “Act of God” such as Hurricane or lightning does not ‘count against’ the customer like on an auto policy if you have a NAF accident. So that is why saying better to report the claim even if minor. There are cases where ‘minor’ damage turns out to be something much more. Better to report it in a timely manner than to have it declined for not reporting. That is what is meant by harm in not reporting vs reporting. Also with Hurricane coverage in Florida there is a calendar year deductible that could come in to play if another storm hits area within the same calendar year and since 2 more months of hurricane season you never know how it will all turn out. a lot of companies have changed their “duties after a loss” so clients should follow the guidelines of their company.