CLUE reports are needed because applicants have selective memory, selecting to forget they had any claims. Why should someone like me who has not had a claim in 18 years pay the same as someone who has had 3 at fault accidents in the last year?
If they turn a claim in because they rear ended someone, but the claimant for whatever reason does not pursue a claim, does that mean the accident was not at fault or that it did not happen? Surcharges are for AT FAULT accidents, what they did to cause the loss to occur.
Fraud; if the consumer advocates, lawmakers, and insurance regulators would spend more time and energy on a proper fraud reporting mechanism, the real culprits could and would be tracked and hopefully caught and the innocent consumers would not be penalized to make up for them. Everyone is afraid to say it like it is so everyone gets to pay as a result. Get real folks, fraud pays only the perpetrators and if they are not stopped, we continue to pay for them. Not using CLUE reports will play a BIG part in that continuing to happen.
There has been a steady move from Field Risk Assessment [pay a buck for factual information] vs. looking at claims history and credit scores.
Insurance Risk is determined by the Law of Large numbers and sound, factual Risk Assessment, but the Bean Counters have come alone and how the Law is Credit Score & Every possible hint of a claim rathered damages paid of not.
CLUE is a way around sound UNDERWRITING, Credit Score around Field RISK ASSESSMENT.
CLUE reports ARE sound underwriting, but just a part of underwriting. Field Risk Assessment (inspection) is also a part. Insurance Scores are also valid, however there appears to be too much emphasis placed on credit data. These are all necessary tools to properly price a risk. Not all companies report losses to ChoicePoint (CLUE) so other underwriting means must replace the void. One issue with CLUE is that realtors are using it to determine if water damage (and subsequent mold) has occurred to homes. Personally, I support this form of buyer protection.
I could not agree more about the CLUE for water damage purposes. Once again it is needed because honesty does not prevail, and it would not be disclosed resulting in all sorts of ramnifications when it was found out too late/after the fact.
Your unidentified comments:
Posted On: July 15, 2004, 5:23 pm EDT
Posted By: To LG
Comment:
Yes, by people who cannot spell or write which is part of the reason for the woes of the USA.
Come out of the Closet and declare yourself, if you are making a statment of importance.
Clue reports are so important. By not allowing a company to rate for patterns in claim making, the insured will definately have no reason to be held accountable for understanding what their policies protect them for.
Clue reports are so important. By not allowing a company to rate for patterns in claim making, the insured will definately have no reason to be held accountable for understanding what their policies protect them for.
Poorly written – the positions have not been clearly outlined in this article.
CLUE reports are needed because applicants have selective memory, selecting to forget they had any claims. Why should someone like me who has not had a claim in 18 years pay the same as someone who has had 3 at fault accidents in the last year?
If they turn a claim in because they rear ended someone, but the claimant for whatever reason does not pursue a claim, does that mean the accident was not at fault or that it did not happen? Surcharges are for AT FAULT accidents, what they did to cause the loss to occur.
Fraud; if the consumer advocates, lawmakers, and insurance regulators would spend more time and energy on a proper fraud reporting mechanism, the real culprits could and would be tracked and hopefully caught and the innocent consumers would not be penalized to make up for them. Everyone is afraid to say it like it is so everyone gets to pay as a result. Get real folks, fraud pays only the perpetrators and if they are not stopped, we continue to pay for them. Not using CLUE reports will play a BIG part in that continuing to happen.
There has been a steady move from Field Risk Assessment [pay a buck for factual information] vs. looking at claims history and credit scores.
Insurance Risk is determined by the Law of Large numbers and sound, factual Risk Assessment, but the Bean Counters have come alone and how the Law is Credit Score & Every possible hint of a claim rathered damages paid of not.
CLUE is a way around sound UNDERWRITING, Credit Score around Field RISK ASSESSMENT.
Yes, by people who cannot spell or write which is part of the reason for the woes of the USA.
CLUE reports ARE sound underwriting, but just a part of underwriting. Field Risk Assessment (inspection) is also a part. Insurance Scores are also valid, however there appears to be too much emphasis placed on credit data. These are all necessary tools to properly price a risk. Not all companies report losses to ChoicePoint (CLUE) so other underwriting means must replace the void. One issue with CLUE is that realtors are using it to determine if water damage (and subsequent mold) has occurred to homes. Personally, I support this form of buyer protection.
I could not agree more about the CLUE for water damage purposes. Once again it is needed because honesty does not prevail, and it would not be disclosed resulting in all sorts of ramnifications when it was found out too late/after the fact.
Come out of the closet and declare yourself.
LG
Your unidentified comments:
Posted On: July 15, 2004, 5:23 pm EDT
Posted By: To LG
Comment:
Yes, by people who cannot spell or write which is part of the reason for the woes of the USA.
Come out of the Closet and declare yourself, if you are making a statment of importance.
LG
Clue reports are so important. By not allowing a company to rate for patterns in claim making, the insured will definately have no reason to be held accountable for understanding what their policies protect them for.
Clue reports are so important. By not allowing a company to rate for patterns in claim making, the insured will definately have no reason to be held accountable for understanding what their policies protect them for.
We certainly seem to have more then our share of critic’s and only one has the Guts to use his name.
If you have time to proof read your every word to the CG/IJ then maybe you need to find a job or do you enjoy backing up to get your paycheck.
Come out of the closet if you have something to say of importance.
LG
What are the other 17 states in which lawmakers or insurance regulators have questioned the practice during the past 18 months?