Impact of Conn. Franchise Ruling May Not Be as Big on Insurance Agents as Claimed

By | January 10, 2005

  • January 10, 2005 at 9:18 am
    Mark says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    State Farm agents are differant. They’re not allowed to sell their agencies. They’re sit up a differant way.

  • January 10, 2005 at 4:42 am
    Rich Pyorre says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It is interesting to note that State Farm was not even mentioned in this article when they probably have the most agents effected by it. There is currently litigation by State Farm agents with State Farm over this very subject. In this litigation with State Farm there has again been testimony by State Farm Executives contradicting what they have previously testified to. Does this suprise anyone? Rich Pyorre

  • February 2, 2005 at 5:07 am
    Carl F. Worden says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    For the third time in 30 years, I have had a contract terminated without cause immediately after assisting an insured with a claim that was wrongfully, and in this case, fraudulently denied.

    American Heritage Life was recently acquired by Allstate Insurance Company. It is a company that specializes in worksite marketing, or payroll deduction enrollments in employer groups.

    One of my insureds was disabled at work from a knee injury and was off work almost 1 year. The policy states that if INJURED while the policy is in force, the benefit would be $900.00 per month of disability, for up to six months.

    AHL paid only one month of disability benefit because the insured let his policy lapse one month after being disabled! AHL claimed the insured had to keep paying his premiums, even though they were deducted via payroll deduction at work. He was disabled, so there was no paycheck to make payroll deductions from!

    AHL Claims was immovable, so I helped the client file a complaint with the CA Department of Insurance, hoping to avoid a nasty lawsuit that was certain to come because the insured knew enough about the law to proceed, and he stated he would if all these other options were not successful.

    When AHL learned that I was actively helping my client — as I’m required to by CA law — they sent an “at will” termination to both me and my wife.

    Clearly, the various state laws are inadequate to protect independent insurance agents from this kind of retribution when they are also required by law to act in the best interests of their clients.

    Feedback would be welcomed here.

    Carl F. Worden



Add a Comment

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

*