“When people go to a State Farm agency, they expect to buy a State Farm policy”??? Yeah well that all worked out until they decided to leave. Do they honesly think the agents are gonna keep the SF logo on their front doors if they’re allowed to be independent on homes? I wouldn’t.
I have called several State Farm agents and they have a flawed sense of loyalty to SF. Jump ship because they will screw you again!! This is like Chris Brown beating Rihanna. She will stay with him through the beatings. I think the state should take away their Citizens contract too. You can’t get a Citizens contract without an admitted carrier writing new home business so why should you be able to keep the contract is you don’t have a prior carrier.
This is the problem with signing a captive agent agreement. Not all companies are going to take the same road that Nationwide and Allstate did in Florida and allow their agents to represent other companies.
Whats the problem with the Insurance commissioner and State Farm. Give them their rate increase and if you dont like it cancel your policy. Its called free market economy or capitalism. I have no problem with them leaving as I would if I were running State Farm. Everyone in Florida thinks insurance companies are like the government. You are not entitled to insurance coverage at a low cost, you are entitled to have it available at what the market will bear for the coverages provided. I know Obama won, but this is still america not Russia.
So if Mccarty is going to automatically rescend the Cert of Authority in Florida this does not allow them to continue to sell those lines in Florida. Explain why State Farm has to do anything at that point, they got what they wanted. Why would they allow the agents to broker with other carriers and move some of the other business away from State Farm? WHo cares if the OIR takes away the certificate, State farm does not really need to respond from what I see. Other than that bit about placing coverage with Citizens, which is a mute point since the State Farm agents will technically no longer be eligible to place business with Citizens if they have no appointment with State Farm.
Seems like the lawyers are going to win on this one and the state is going to waste a lot of time and MONEY that we don’t have.
Wake up State farms agents. The grass is NOT greener on this side, but at least we have grass.
If I owned a State Farm franchise, it would be FOR SALE – valid point on the Citizens issue – they won’t be able to proove there is not a standard market to Citizens on these H/O policies therefore, their Citizens contract should be made null and void – Come On State Farm – For ONCE do what’s right for your agents!!
State Farm has restricted its writnigs in other coastal states. If there were to allow their agents to represent other carriers, then it would open the door across the country, and SF doesn’t want to lose control of their agents.
The OIR should have given SF the rate increase and let the consumers choose.
Don’t worry about Obama and the Democrats socializing the economy, Christ and the Republican Legislature have done a pretty good job with the insurance industry in this state!
SF agents are technically employees of State Farm. These agents have their retirment plans and E&O exposure covered by SF. State farm is very much aware that the start up carriers who are counting on no storms or FIGA as their business model. They know that these carriers will not be able to meet their obligations after a storm. WHO WILL END UP PAYING THE CLAIMS FROM POLICIES ISSUED BY EMPLOYEES THAT DO NOT PAY? STATE FARM.
As an Independent Agency owner with eight admitted homeowenrs carriers other then Citizens and three auto companies I can place coverage for all most any State Farm policy holder.
The bad thing about letting the SF agents go independent is that they don’t know the products because they are captive agents and the insurers would be taking away from current independent agents that have been waiting for appointments because they insurers don’t want any new agents in Florida.
All the Allstate insureds found policies and I have 95% of them still on the books.
If SF is leaving the Sunshine State then they should not be allowed to write any type of insurance in this state. Let the SF agents bring their book of business with the to an independent agent that will write the business and train the licensee how the insurance world really is here in Florida.
Why shouldn’t they be allowed to write other coverages in the state Insurance Lady? What is your reasoning? Should all companies that write non property lines be required to write property? That has never made sense to me. If a business feels it is losing money in a line for any product, why should they have to leave entirely if they decide not to sell that one product. I have heard this arguement before and it has never made sense to me.
Wow. You really think that since SF Agents “don’t know the product” they can’t learn and need you to teach them. Here’s my guess – there are more endorsements & coverage options on a State Farm HO policy than any of the eight HO carriers you have. Probably means a SF agent knows a little about HO insurance.
Just because you have 8 admitted carriers and 3 auto carriers, let me guess, No homeowners carrier that is rated by Best except the Tower Hill Co’s or ASI. Which are just as much garbage. The auto carriers are Progressive (who anyone can get, and GMAC. Bucket shop carriers.
Florida needs companies like State Farm and we need to bring back the larger national carriers to Florida, Travelers, Firemans Fund, Hartford, Auto Owners, Nationwide, Allstate, Cincinati. Then you will have stability and security. Rather than this crap we are buying now.
The carriers mentioned are in this agency and the auto carriers are Best “A” Rated. My own HO policy is with SF & it has doubled in the last two years for no other reason then rate inceases. I do agree that maybe the State allowing the rate increase would let the consumers make the choice. State Farm is an great company but enough is enough. There are some good Demotech carriers in the State that came in after Andrew and are still around and are working on their Best Rating. I have two of those carreirs and place business with them if they do not fit the guidelines of the Big Boy’s.
You have your insurance with SF at twice the cost and you represent 8 other carriers that you have complete cinfidence in ??? I’m IA as a result of selling my Allstate agenct 7 years ago and wouldn’t have another company I that I don’t represent to be my insuring carrier. Something seems wrong with your picture.
There are no Big Boys writing in Florida. There are no good Demotech companies, because Demotech will give anyone an A rating if they get paid enough. If these companies are so great why dont you have your own home insured with them instead of State Farm.
Please read the 9th and 10 paragraph of this article copied below:
The petition argues state law doesn’t give McCarty the power to prohibit any insurer from making a business decision to stop operating in Florida and that allowing agents to write policies for companies, with the exception of Citizens, would violate the exclusivity provision of their contracts with State Farm Florida.
“When people go to a State Farm Florida agent, they expect to buy a policy of a State Farm Florida affiliate,” company lawyers wrote in the petition.
Apparently State Farm conveniently forgot they allow agents (on the same contract)to write for other companies in other states. Baldwin Mutual is an example in Alabama.
This is just another example of State Farm saying one thing and doing another. If they are really leaving the state for good why would they care if their agents wrote for another company?
Bill, great point to let them have their rate increase and let the SF customers decide. I would agree. But if McCarty allows this he will have several other, under-funded, small Fla domestic carriers standing in line waiting for their increase as well.
The state has relied heavily on coastal development and it won’t allow any entity to undermine this, irrespective of the actual revenue needed to cover their costs.
What is interesting to me is that many of the postings on articles regarding State Farm refer to Demotech rating of carriers and start up companies not meeting financial standards. Yet State Farm says they are losing $20 million a month and will be broke in 18 months in Florida. If that is the case, I don’t buy the arguement of so many SF defenders that the new carriers are sub par to their standards. So what is the difference between staying with SF and they go broke (so much for their Best rating) or being with a newer carrier who is at least writing and by many appearances is trying to learn from others mistakes? Also, no one at any level has come to our rescue when we had national carriers non renew their homeowners books. If anything, this shows the strength of the independent system.
What is the problem of the start ups wanting a rate increase? If they get a rate increase and it is too much, so what people will move their insurance. Maybe they should take a rate increase, it appears to me that they are the real ones who need a rate increase due to the fact they have no cash. When did we all become victims of business. This class warfare/socialist agenda has turned everyone into complain and blame victims. Let every company charge whatever they want and you will see serious competition in property lines. If you give a carrier rate relief and catastrophy containment, all the carriers will want to write here. The start ups will have to compete on quality as well as price.
State Farm has 63 BILLION in Surplus.(2008 Best’s) Demotech will give anyone a rating who has a checkbook. You are talking about State Farm Florida. It is not even a thought that State Farm would go broke, They could continue if the wanted to indefinitly with Florida. They just have chosen not to write in Florida for the premium we want them to. It is a free country and obviously if they were making alot of money, they would stay. (Common Sense) To say the start ups are doing it better is hogwash. They dont have adjusters, regional offices, or cash in the bank. They are set up with an MGA handling the admin and sucking all the money out of the carrier until the storm hits then they hand the keys to FIGA. They we all will be assessed for their ponzi scam. They dont care about adequate rate. The DFS just filed suit against one this past week. Peoples Insurance Company for sales without agents and fraudulent business practices. These companies are garbage. Wake up, and let the good companies charge whatever they want.
Amen Bill, here is the link to the website for the action against start up without agents Peoples Trust Insurance MGA. Yes this is how they are providing nothing for nothing.
1. Start a company with borrowed 5 million.
2. Create a MGA to administer (Ha) the company.
3 Charge 65% of the premiums for doing so.
4. Put together some bulls*it reinsurance
5. Give the keys to FIGA when the wind blows.
6. Let all the citizens and good carriers,if any are left to pay for your loses through FIGA assessments.
7. Pay off the 5 million loan and pocket the rest through your MGA.
Bill – Maybe SF has $63 billion nationally, but all we hear from SF and their agents is that they are losing $20 million a month and that in 18 months or less they will be bankrupt (quote). I know it is SF Florida, but SF national is supposedly letting them sink or swim on their own. They can’t have it both ways, and it is like the pot calling the kettle black when they belittle start up carriers etc. I wish we could convince national or large regional carriers with good financial standing to write here in FL, but that isn’t going to happen. What I meant by the start ups not making the same mistakes, its that the ones we are using have people with extensive backgrounds in the industry running them and we have to put our faith there or citizens, I’ll choose the start ups any day. The biggest surprise for many customers who have come to us due to the SF homeowners issue is that they are finding out just how uncompetitive their auto rates are. We are using an A++ large regional and in most cases saving them hundreds or more, then they really feel used after staying with SF all these years. That is how the free market system really works.
State Farm and other carriers, including Citizens, need a rate increase. That is the lesson elected politicians need to get out to homeowners. It will take the average Floridian many months of that correct message for it to sink in. Once that lesson takes hold, we can then try to teach them why a rate increase is necessary. Floridians have been done a disservice so far, having been told they can get something for nothing. How many consecutive years do they have to witness something completely contrary to what they have been told in order for them to believe what they see, and not what they hear, by politicians and lawyers whose primary purpose is to one, be wealthy and two, gain power.
Mississippi’s Rep. Taylor Renews Push for Federal Wind Insurance Policy
March 10, 2009
·
Rep. Gene Taylor, D.-Miss., isn’t letting opposition by major insurance companies keep him from pushing his plan to make wind coverage for properties available through the federal flood insurance program.
Taylor’s proposal — the Multiple Peril Insurance Act of 2009– amends the National Flood Insurance Program to permit homeowners the option of purchasing both wind and flood coverage in one policy. In 2007, the House of Representatives passed Taylor’s bill by a vote of 263-146. But The Senate did not follow the House lead.
Taylor argues that no one can predict with accuracy whether wind or water or both will damage or destroy a property. As long as the insurance industry is allowed to require home and business owners to purchase separate wind and flood policies from different carriers–some private sector and others public– the question of whether wind or water caused the property damage will continue to be a property owner’s financial nightmare, he says.
Taylor, who voted against the Obama stimulus package, thinks the recession could boost his bill’s chances this time around. He contends that his reform would help create private sector jobs without a cost to taxpayers because insurance would be affordable and insurance funds would be available for rebuilding after a storm.
“Apparently, the insurance industry no longer wants to cover people for wind damage in coastal America or will not provide that coverage at a cost that is reasonable,” Taylor said when he reintroduced his bill this month. “Throughout coastal America, property insurance companies have dramatically increased premiums on existing policies, cancelled existing policies, or have stopped writing new policies altogether for our nation’s home and business owners. The Multiple Peril Insurance Act will solve this problem. It will also stimulate the economy throughout coastal America, particularly here in the Katrina area of the nation.”
According to Taylor, this homeowner insurance crisis extends far beyond the states that Katrina directly hit. The crisis extends from the Gulf Coast state of Texas to Florida to the Atlantic Coast including New Jersey and New York.
“As we found out after Katrina and our fellow Texans are finding out now after Ike and Gustav,” Taylor said, “short of home and business owners hiring lawyers and engineers to take their carriers to court, insurance companies routinely and deliberately fail to pay on legitimate hurricane-related wind claims. No one should have to go through this. It isn’t fair to American homeowners and it must end.”
Taylor has even launched a website to build support for his legislation.
But private insurers contend Taylor’s measure would needlessly displace them in the marketplace, disrupt existing state funds and burden taxpayers.
The Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI) says wind coverage is already available either through private insurers or state wind pools. Private or state residual markets for windstorm coverage already exist for more than 99 percent of all coastal properties in the United States. Only properties in significant disrepair, representing less than 1 percent of the total, are uninsurable through these programs, according to PCI.
“While this legislation is well-intentioned, it is both unnecessary and fraught with unintended negative consequences, and it ultimately will not help homeowners in need,” said David A. Sampson, PCI’s president and CEO.
The following coastal states (and the District of Columbia) have a Fair Access to Insurance Requirements (FAIR) plan: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. Additionally, five states (Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas) have programs designed specifically to provide windstorm coverage, and Florida and Louisiana each have a Citizens Property Insurance Corporation. All of these residual market plans offer either windstorm coverage or property insurance coverage including coverage for windstorms.
“Although supporters of multiperil insurance tell us that windstorm coverage is unavailable in coastal areas, the fact is that wind coverage is universally available for homes in insurable condition,” Sampson said. “Where private coverage currently does not exist, homeowners can obtain wind insurance through state residual market plans.”
PCI believes that federal windstorm coverage could create tremendous negative impacts on the economy.
According to a PCI analysis, the cost to the U.S. economy in the form of displaced jobs could be as high as 65,000 if the bulk of the property insurance marketplace purchased the proposed multiple-peril coverage.
The loss of revenue from such a market displacement would result in more than $1 billion in lost state premium tax revenue and more than $1 billion in individual state and federal income tax revenues, PCI says.
Availability of reinsurance may also be adversely affected, because if wind exposure shifts from the private marketplace to a federal program, reinsurers may be less willing to invest capital in the U.S. market.
“Given America’s current economic challenges, it would be a very bad idea to diminish private investment in insurance markets and wipe out thousands of jobs,” Sampson said. “To assist homeowners who truly cannot afford their wind insurance premiums, we believe Congress could consider providing a subsidy that would be phased out over time. The multiple peril proposal is a solution in search of a problem.”
According to Sampson, the best thing lawmakers can do is to renew the federal flood program as it is without pausing to add wind coverage. The federal program is currently slated to expire this week unless Congress passes a continuation.
So if the rest of the country pays for the real exposure, carriers will be happy to stay. Great thought for those of us in other states who don’t want to pay for problems exclusive to Florida. If you want to live there you need to pay the cost of living there.
THESE CARRIERS ARE A PONZI… They are all set up to fail and pocket your premiums.
No Cherry picking State Farm. What does that mean? They are leaving for good and I would as well with idiots like this unnamed guy who can not figure it out that there are no quality carriers left in the state of Florida.
I’m a Texas agent that has seen SF stop selling home policies a number of times here. Texas’ answer to Citizens is the Fair Plan. When SF quit selling home policies in Texas their agents flooded the Fair Plan even though the policy application clearly stated that the insured must been declined by at least two other carriers. McCarty should place this same restriction on SF agents – SF would have to let them write with other carriers.
SF home policies are loaded with endorsements – thats great! The problem is that most SF agents don’t know anything about the endorsement of non-SF policies. Allowing SF agents to write with other carriers may educate them to the world of insurance outside of SF. Maybe then they won’t make so many mistakes when comparing SF policies with others. I’m not getting down on SF agents but, rather on SF. SF simply doesn’t keep their agents aware of what endorsements other carriers have added to their policies.
If SF wants to quit selling auto in Florida then why not. Many carriers sell only certain lines – they are solid and dependable.
Not a state farm agent, but State Farm is the largest homeowners carrier in the united states. I dont think they got there by not paying their claims. They just did not want to pay flood claims for the people who did not buy flood coverage after Katrina. But hey now that we are a socialist country, look for more beating up carriers for not paying claims they shouldnt.
I’m sure the state government could have done a worse job handling this…but I’m not sure how!
While they’re at it , let them take their auto insurance business elsewhere too.
“When people go to a State Farm agency, they expect to buy a State Farm policy”??? Yeah well that all worked out until they decided to leave. Do they honesly think the agents are gonna keep the SF logo on their front doors if they’re allowed to be independent on homes? I wouldn’t.
I have called several State Farm agents and they have a flawed sense of loyalty to SF. Jump ship because they will screw you again!! This is like Chris Brown beating Rihanna. She will stay with him through the beatings. I think the state should take away their Citizens contract too. You can’t get a Citizens contract without an admitted carrier writing new home business so why should you be able to keep the contract is you don’t have a prior carrier.
This is the problem with signing a captive agent agreement. Not all companies are going to take the same road that Nationwide and Allstate did in Florida and allow their agents to represent other companies.
Whats the problem with the Insurance commissioner and State Farm. Give them their rate increase and if you dont like it cancel your policy. Its called free market economy or capitalism. I have no problem with them leaving as I would if I were running State Farm. Everyone in Florida thinks insurance companies are like the government. You are not entitled to insurance coverage at a low cost, you are entitled to have it available at what the market will bear for the coverages provided. I know Obama won, but this is still america not Russia.
So if Mccarty is going to automatically rescend the Cert of Authority in Florida this does not allow them to continue to sell those lines in Florida. Explain why State Farm has to do anything at that point, they got what they wanted. Why would they allow the agents to broker with other carriers and move some of the other business away from State Farm? WHo cares if the OIR takes away the certificate, State farm does not really need to respond from what I see. Other than that bit about placing coverage with Citizens, which is a mute point since the State Farm agents will technically no longer be eligible to place business with Citizens if they have no appointment with State Farm.
Seems like the lawyers are going to win on this one and the state is going to waste a lot of time and MONEY that we don’t have.
Wake up State farms agents. The grass is NOT greener on this side, but at least we have grass.
If I owned a State Farm franchise, it would be FOR SALE – valid point on the Citizens issue – they won’t be able to proove there is not a standard market to Citizens on these H/O policies therefore, their Citizens contract should be made null and void – Come On State Farm – For ONCE do what’s right for your agents!!
State Farm has restricted its writnigs in other coastal states. If there were to allow their agents to represent other carriers, then it would open the door across the country, and SF doesn’t want to lose control of their agents.
The OIR should have given SF the rate increase and let the consumers choose.
Don’t worry about Obama and the Democrats socializing the economy, Christ and the Republican Legislature have done a pretty good job with the insurance industry in this state!
SF agents are technically employees of State Farm. These agents have their retirment plans and E&O exposure covered by SF. State farm is very much aware that the start up carriers who are counting on no storms or FIGA as their business model. They know that these carriers will not be able to meet their obligations after a storm. WHO WILL END UP PAYING THE CLAIMS FROM POLICIES ISSUED BY EMPLOYEES THAT DO NOT PAY? STATE FARM.
As an Independent Agency owner with eight admitted homeowenrs carriers other then Citizens and three auto companies I can place coverage for all most any State Farm policy holder.
The bad thing about letting the SF agents go independent is that they don’t know the products because they are captive agents and the insurers would be taking away from current independent agents that have been waiting for appointments because they insurers don’t want any new agents in Florida.
All the Allstate insureds found policies and I have 95% of them still on the books.
If SF is leaving the Sunshine State then they should not be allowed to write any type of insurance in this state. Let the SF agents bring their book of business with the to an independent agent that will write the business and train the licensee how the insurance world really is here in Florida.
Jr, did you say mute point?
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moot_point
Why shouldn’t they be allowed to write other coverages in the state Insurance Lady? What is your reasoning? Should all companies that write non property lines be required to write property? That has never made sense to me. If a business feels it is losing money in a line for any product, why should they have to leave entirely if they decide not to sell that one product. I have heard this arguement before and it has never made sense to me.
Wow. You really think that since SF Agents “don’t know the product” they can’t learn and need you to teach them. Here’s my guess – there are more endorsements & coverage options on a State Farm HO policy than any of the eight HO carriers you have. Probably means a SF agent knows a little about HO insurance.
Just because you have 8 admitted carriers and 3 auto carriers, let me guess, No homeowners carrier that is rated by Best except the Tower Hill Co’s or ASI. Which are just as much garbage. The auto carriers are Progressive (who anyone can get, and GMAC. Bucket shop carriers.
Florida needs companies like State Farm and we need to bring back the larger national carriers to Florida, Travelers, Firemans Fund, Hartford, Auto Owners, Nationwide, Allstate, Cincinati. Then you will have stability and security. Rather than this crap we are buying now.
The carriers mentioned are in this agency and the auto carriers are Best “A” Rated. My own HO policy is with SF & it has doubled in the last two years for no other reason then rate inceases. I do agree that maybe the State allowing the rate increase would let the consumers make the choice. State Farm is an great company but enough is enough. There are some good Demotech carriers in the State that came in after Andrew and are still around and are working on their Best Rating. I have two of those carreirs and place business with them if they do not fit the guidelines of the Big Boy’s.
You have your insurance with SF at twice the cost and you represent 8 other carriers that you have complete cinfidence in ??? I’m IA as a result of selling my Allstate agenct 7 years ago and wouldn’t have another company I that I don’t represent to be my insuring carrier. Something seems wrong with your picture.
We should let the state of Flordia go and be done with it :-)
There are no Big Boys writing in Florida. There are no good Demotech companies, because Demotech will give anyone an A rating if they get paid enough. If these companies are so great why dont you have your own home insured with them instead of State Farm.
Please read the 9th and 10 paragraph of this article copied below:
The petition argues state law doesn’t give McCarty the power to prohibit any insurer from making a business decision to stop operating in Florida and that allowing agents to write policies for companies, with the exception of Citizens, would violate the exclusivity provision of their contracts with State Farm Florida.
“When people go to a State Farm Florida agent, they expect to buy a policy of a State Farm Florida affiliate,” company lawyers wrote in the petition.
Apparently State Farm conveniently forgot they allow agents (on the same contract)to write for other companies in other states. Baldwin Mutual is an example in Alabama.
This is just another example of State Farm saying one thing and doing another. If they are really leaving the state for good why would they care if their agents wrote for another company?
THE TEN WORST INS COMPANIES
Comment:
http://www.coloradolaw.net/pdfs/TenWorstInsuranceCompanies.pdf
Bill, great point to let them have their rate increase and let the SF customers decide. I would agree. But if McCarty allows this he will have several other, under-funded, small Fla domestic carriers standing in line waiting for their increase as well.
The state has relied heavily on coastal development and it won’t allow any entity to undermine this, irrespective of the actual revenue needed to cover their costs.
NO cherry picking STATE FARM.
What is interesting to me is that many of the postings on articles regarding State Farm refer to Demotech rating of carriers and start up companies not meeting financial standards. Yet State Farm says they are losing $20 million a month and will be broke in 18 months in Florida. If that is the case, I don’t buy the arguement of so many SF defenders that the new carriers are sub par to their standards. So what is the difference between staying with SF and they go broke (so much for their Best rating) or being with a newer carrier who is at least writing and by many appearances is trying to learn from others mistakes? Also, no one at any level has come to our rescue when we had national carriers non renew their homeowners books. If anything, this shows the strength of the independent system.
What is the problem of the start ups wanting a rate increase? If they get a rate increase and it is too much, so what people will move their insurance. Maybe they should take a rate increase, it appears to me that they are the real ones who need a rate increase due to the fact they have no cash. When did we all become victims of business. This class warfare/socialist agenda has turned everyone into complain and blame victims. Let every company charge whatever they want and you will see serious competition in property lines. If you give a carrier rate relief and catastrophy containment, all the carriers will want to write here. The start ups will have to compete on quality as well as price.
State Farm has 63 BILLION in Surplus.(2008 Best’s) Demotech will give anyone a rating who has a checkbook. You are talking about State Farm Florida. It is not even a thought that State Farm would go broke, They could continue if the wanted to indefinitly with Florida. They just have chosen not to write in Florida for the premium we want them to. It is a free country and obviously if they were making alot of money, they would stay. (Common Sense) To say the start ups are doing it better is hogwash. They dont have adjusters, regional offices, or cash in the bank. They are set up with an MGA handling the admin and sucking all the money out of the carrier until the storm hits then they hand the keys to FIGA. They we all will be assessed for their ponzi scam. They dont care about adequate rate. The DFS just filed suit against one this past week. Peoples Insurance Company for sales without agents and fraudulent business practices. These companies are garbage. Wake up, and let the good companies charge whatever they want.
Amen Bill, here is the link to the website for the action against start up without agents Peoples Trust Insurance MGA. Yes this is how they are providing nothing for nothing.
http://www.myfloridacfo.com/pressoffice/ViewMediaRelease.asp?ID=3131
These start up carriers are a PONZI!
1. Start a company with borrowed 5 million.
2. Create a MGA to administer (Ha) the company.
3 Charge 65% of the premiums for doing so.
4. Put together some bulls*it reinsurance
5. Give the keys to FIGA when the wind blows.
6. Let all the citizens and good carriers,if any are left to pay for your loses through FIGA assessments.
7. Pay off the 5 million loan and pocket the rest through your MGA.
WAKE UP! THIS IS THE PLAN IN PLACE.
Bill – Maybe SF has $63 billion nationally, but all we hear from SF and their agents is that they are losing $20 million a month and that in 18 months or less they will be bankrupt (quote). I know it is SF Florida, but SF national is supposedly letting them sink or swim on their own. They can’t have it both ways, and it is like the pot calling the kettle black when they belittle start up carriers etc. I wish we could convince national or large regional carriers with good financial standing to write here in FL, but that isn’t going to happen. What I meant by the start ups not making the same mistakes, its that the ones we are using have people with extensive backgrounds in the industry running them and we have to put our faith there or citizens, I’ll choose the start ups any day. The biggest surprise for many customers who have come to us due to the SF homeowners issue is that they are finding out just how uncompetitive their auto rates are. We are using an A++ large regional and in most cases saving them hundreds or more, then they really feel used after staying with SF all these years. That is how the free market system really works.
State Farm and other carriers, including Citizens, need a rate increase. That is the lesson elected politicians need to get out to homeowners. It will take the average Floridian many months of that correct message for it to sink in. Once that lesson takes hold, we can then try to teach them why a rate increase is necessary. Floridians have been done a disservice so far, having been told they can get something for nothing. How many consecutive years do they have to witness something completely contrary to what they have been told in order for them to believe what they see, and not what they hear, by politicians and lawyers whose primary purpose is to one, be wealthy and two, gain power.
IN THE NEWS TODAY!!
Mississippi’s Rep. Taylor Renews Push for Federal Wind Insurance Policy
March 10, 2009
·
Rep. Gene Taylor, D.-Miss., isn’t letting opposition by major insurance companies keep him from pushing his plan to make wind coverage for properties available through the federal flood insurance program.
Taylor’s proposal — the Multiple Peril Insurance Act of 2009– amends the National Flood Insurance Program to permit homeowners the option of purchasing both wind and flood coverage in one policy. In 2007, the House of Representatives passed Taylor’s bill by a vote of 263-146. But The Senate did not follow the House lead.
Taylor argues that no one can predict with accuracy whether wind or water or both will damage or destroy a property. As long as the insurance industry is allowed to require home and business owners to purchase separate wind and flood policies from different carriers–some private sector and others public– the question of whether wind or water caused the property damage will continue to be a property owner’s financial nightmare, he says.
Taylor, who voted against the Obama stimulus package, thinks the recession could boost his bill’s chances this time around. He contends that his reform would help create private sector jobs without a cost to taxpayers because insurance would be affordable and insurance funds would be available for rebuilding after a storm.
“Apparently, the insurance industry no longer wants to cover people for wind damage in coastal America or will not provide that coverage at a cost that is reasonable,” Taylor said when he reintroduced his bill this month. “Throughout coastal America, property insurance companies have dramatically increased premiums on existing policies, cancelled existing policies, or have stopped writing new policies altogether for our nation’s home and business owners. The Multiple Peril Insurance Act will solve this problem. It will also stimulate the economy throughout coastal America, particularly here in the Katrina area of the nation.”
According to Taylor, this homeowner insurance crisis extends far beyond the states that Katrina directly hit. The crisis extends from the Gulf Coast state of Texas to Florida to the Atlantic Coast including New Jersey and New York.
“As we found out after Katrina and our fellow Texans are finding out now after Ike and Gustav,” Taylor said, “short of home and business owners hiring lawyers and engineers to take their carriers to court, insurance companies routinely and deliberately fail to pay on legitimate hurricane-related wind claims. No one should have to go through this. It isn’t fair to American homeowners and it must end.”
Taylor has even launched a website to build support for his legislation.
But private insurers contend Taylor’s measure would needlessly displace them in the marketplace, disrupt existing state funds and burden taxpayers.
The Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI) says wind coverage is already available either through private insurers or state wind pools. Private or state residual markets for windstorm coverage already exist for more than 99 percent of all coastal properties in the United States. Only properties in significant disrepair, representing less than 1 percent of the total, are uninsurable through these programs, according to PCI.
“While this legislation is well-intentioned, it is both unnecessary and fraught with unintended negative consequences, and it ultimately will not help homeowners in need,” said David A. Sampson, PCI’s president and CEO.
The following coastal states (and the District of Columbia) have a Fair Access to Insurance Requirements (FAIR) plan: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. Additionally, five states (Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas) have programs designed specifically to provide windstorm coverage, and Florida and Louisiana each have a Citizens Property Insurance Corporation. All of these residual market plans offer either windstorm coverage or property insurance coverage including coverage for windstorms.
“Although supporters of multiperil insurance tell us that windstorm coverage is unavailable in coastal areas, the fact is that wind coverage is universally available for homes in insurable condition,” Sampson said. “Where private coverage currently does not exist, homeowners can obtain wind insurance through state residual market plans.”
PCI believes that federal windstorm coverage could create tremendous negative impacts on the economy.
According to a PCI analysis, the cost to the U.S. economy in the form of displaced jobs could be as high as 65,000 if the bulk of the property insurance marketplace purchased the proposed multiple-peril coverage.
The loss of revenue from such a market displacement would result in more than $1 billion in lost state premium tax revenue and more than $1 billion in individual state and federal income tax revenues, PCI says.
Availability of reinsurance may also be adversely affected, because if wind exposure shifts from the private marketplace to a federal program, reinsurers may be less willing to invest capital in the U.S. market.
“Given America’s current economic challenges, it would be a very bad idea to diminish private investment in insurance markets and wipe out thousands of jobs,” Sampson said. “To assist homeowners who truly cannot afford their wind insurance premiums, we believe Congress could consider providing a subsidy that would be phased out over time. The multiple peril proposal is a solution in search of a problem.”
According to Sampson, the best thing lawmakers can do is to renew the federal flood program as it is without pausing to add wind coverage. The federal program is currently slated to expire this week unless Congress passes a continuation.
So if the rest of the country pays for the real exposure, carriers will be happy to stay. Great thought for those of us in other states who don’t want to pay for problems exclusive to Florida. If you want to live there you need to pay the cost of living there.
You guys make too much sense. This is a political dream. Bash evil insurance companies and VOTE FOR ME!
To stop this kind of crap you need true TERM LIMITS FOR THESE EGOMANIACS.
THE WIND BLOWS NO PAY THE WATER COMES NO PAY- FRIE NOPAY. State farm what a joke.
We will pay 5 times more for wind and you will pay 5 times more for flood if you live on the banks of the Mississipi river.
THESE CARRIERS ARE A PONZI… They are all set up to fail and pocket your premiums.
No Cherry picking State Farm. What does that mean? They are leaving for good and I would as well with idiots like this unnamed guy who can not figure it out that there are no quality carriers left in the state of Florida.
AMEN RICK! GET RID OF THE CLOSET DEMOCRAT CRIST!
I’m a Texas agent that has seen SF stop selling home policies a number of times here. Texas’ answer to Citizens is the Fair Plan. When SF quit selling home policies in Texas their agents flooded the Fair Plan even though the policy application clearly stated that the insured must been declined by at least two other carriers. McCarty should place this same restriction on SF agents – SF would have to let them write with other carriers.
SF home policies are loaded with endorsements – thats great! The problem is that most SF agents don’t know anything about the endorsement of non-SF policies. Allowing SF agents to write with other carriers may educate them to the world of insurance outside of SF. Maybe then they won’t make so many mistakes when comparing SF policies with others. I’m not getting down on SF agents but, rather on SF. SF simply doesn’t keep their agents aware of what endorsements other carriers have added to their policies.
If SF wants to quit selling auto in Florida then why not. Many carriers sell only certain lines – they are solid and dependable.
Not a state farm agent, but State Farm is the largest homeowners carrier in the united states. I dont think they got there by not paying their claims. They just did not want to pay flood claims for the people who did not buy flood coverage after Katrina. But hey now that we are a socialist country, look for more beating up carriers for not paying claims they shouldnt.