It’s a great program if you don’t have any losses. However, if you have losses, than you’ll experience exactly what Shasta Linen has: a bill sent to you for a total premium which exceeds the quoted amount. It’s the opposite of what an indexed annuity does for a client; e.g., rewards the client with upswings in the market, but doesn’t expose the client to any market losses. With Equity Comp, though, CA Insur. Co./ No. Amer, Cas. Co./Applied Underwriters/Berkshire Hathaway doesn’t do anything for the client who submits no claims, but overly punishes the clients who do submit claims. They should stick to selling regular WC.
As a broker, it is a nightmare to try and explain the coverage and costs of the terms offered and a good way to have an errors and omissions claim filed against the agency. I do not sell the product specifically over that concern and feel Applied, Shasta, and the broker that presented the messy proposal are all to blame, all of them were greedy and share the blame. The guaranteed rate on most carrier’s terms, removes the idea of gambling with a large potential cost in the end for worker’s compensation, perhaps the gaming commission of California is another department that should review the terms. The issue with work comp in California is that safety is only part of avoiding a claim, the more difficult issue is that fraudulent claims are all too often paid out as well and that has very little to do with your experience modification factor.
I think Shasta should be out a lot of money, along with the carrier (CIC and Applied). The courts should not bail out people from poor business decisions or poor home loan terms either. Businesses and people need to take responsibility for their decisions, the people that save a lot of money like you mention at the beginning and did not have claims are not complaining, only the losers are. It is like complaining after a loss at a black jack table that you want your money back.
It’s a great program if you don’t have any losses. However, if you have losses, than you’ll experience exactly what Shasta Linen has: a bill sent to you for a total premium which exceeds the quoted amount. It’s the opposite of what an indexed annuity does for a client; e.g., rewards the client with upswings in the market, but doesn’t expose the client to any market losses. With Equity Comp, though, CA Insur. Co./ No. Amer, Cas. Co./Applied Underwriters/Berkshire Hathaway doesn’t do anything for the client who submits no claims, but overly punishes the clients who do submit claims. They should stick to selling regular WC.
As a broker, it is a nightmare to try and explain the coverage and costs of the terms offered and a good way to have an errors and omissions claim filed against the agency. I do not sell the product specifically over that concern and feel Applied, Shasta, and the broker that presented the messy proposal are all to blame, all of them were greedy and share the blame. The guaranteed rate on most carrier’s terms, removes the idea of gambling with a large potential cost in the end for worker’s compensation, perhaps the gaming commission of California is another department that should review the terms. The issue with work comp in California is that safety is only part of avoiding a claim, the more difficult issue is that fraudulent claims are all too often paid out as well and that has very little to do with your experience modification factor.
I think Shasta should be out a lot of money, along with the carrier (CIC and Applied). The courts should not bail out people from poor business decisions or poor home loan terms either. Businesses and people need to take responsibility for their decisions, the people that save a lot of money like you mention at the beginning and did not have claims are not complaining, only the losers are. It is like complaining after a loss at a black jack table that you want your money back.