In this competitive insurance world, kickbacks are unfortunately used often and well known. I wonder the State of SC can make a real case out of this and, at least for government business, start the “outing” process for these types of arrangements. We can only hope.
Kickbacks are used often and well known? I’ve owned an agency for 18 years and have worked as an insurance broker for 25. In that time I’ve never paid a kickback, have never been asked to pay a kickback and have never know of anyone paying or receiving a kickback or a rebate.
I must be operating under a rock and therefore the reason for only generating $5mm annual revenue.
Thank you for running an honest business. I’ve been in the business 32 years on the company side and never offered a kickback nor every heard of anyone I worked with offering a kickback. I’ve never directly known of this existing – only have read about it in stories like this. I also debate the “common and known” assertion.
Kickbacks aside…Most would contend that the school district effectively transferred its risks as all of the excessive coverages are designed to respond to real live exposure to loss (ex: Cyber). Imagine if Insured’s were encouraged to sue their Agents for selling them “excessive coverage” because they didn’t have any claims.
Equally obvious is the fact that had there been an uninsured claim, these folks would have been the first to sue their Agent for not providing sufficient risk transfer options.
Time for going back to basics, Coverage available, price, not interested signoff on it…Working a school district can be interesting, but there are servicing issues, A fee is one thing, but 41% WOW…!!!
I agree they should go to jail for the kickbacks. However, when are the following excessive or unneeded if you do not have it? “crime, cyber policies, general liability, directors and officer’s liability.” The article did not say they already had these coverages or what the limits are but School districts that I work with see large claims (and self insure the first layers). Most need additional layers for these claims. Also, I did not see Sexual Abuse and Molestation listed so if this was sold and there were no claims, would this be considered excessive or unneeded?
In this competitive insurance world, kickbacks are unfortunately used often and well known. I wonder the State of SC can make a real case out of this and, at least for government business, start the “outing” process for these types of arrangements. We can only hope.
41% in fees! Unbelievable
There was no harm done to children of the district, only its taxpayers.
Taxpayers should not have to pay for these kickbacks either.
This is nothing new and in some states kickbacks are not allowed.
Kickbacks are used often and well known? I’ve owned an agency for 18 years and have worked as an insurance broker for 25. In that time I’ve never paid a kickback, have never been asked to pay a kickback and have never know of anyone paying or receiving a kickback or a rebate.
I must be operating under a rock and therefore the reason for only generating $5mm annual revenue.
Thank you for running an honest business. I’ve been in the business 32 years on the company side and never offered a kickback nor every heard of anyone I worked with offering a kickback. I’ve never directly known of this existing – only have read about it in stories like this. I also debate the “common and known” assertion.
Kickbacks aside…Most would contend that the school district effectively transferred its risks as all of the excessive coverages are designed to respond to real live exposure to loss (ex: Cyber). Imagine if Insured’s were encouraged to sue their Agents for selling them “excessive coverage” because they didn’t have any claims.
Equally obvious is the fact that had there been an uninsured claim, these folks would have been the first to sue their Agent for not providing sufficient risk transfer options.
Only a J.D. could come up with this stuff.
Time for going back to basics, Coverage available, price, not interested signoff on it…Working a school district can be interesting, but there are servicing issues, A fee is one thing, but 41% WOW…!!!
I agree they should go to jail for the kickbacks. However, when are the following excessive or unneeded if you do not have it? “crime, cyber policies, general liability, directors and officer’s liability.” The article did not say they already had these coverages or what the limits are but School districts that I work with see large claims (and self insure the first layers). Most need additional layers for these claims. Also, I did not see Sexual Abuse and Molestation listed so if this was sold and there were no claims, would this be considered excessive or unneeded?