If these people don’t like State Farm’s rates, why don’t they just go to another carrier? Why all the fuss? Waste of time and money with only the lawyers getting rich in the end.
This group does not really care about State Farm rates. They get compensated at rates between $300 to $600 per hour to challenge filings. One of the many downsides of Prop 103 was enabling groups like this to collect this type of money which the policyholder ultimately pays out. It creates a corrupt system and enables the result detailed in the articles.
Carriers pay tens of thousands of dollars just for the review, even if it doesn’t turn into a formal intervention. I often wonder if consumers, who these groups claim to protect, realize they are paying higher insurance rates as a result of their “protection”.
The Consumer Watchdog and Judge may want to consider a longer horizon before using temperamental lingo like “overcharging”?
Assume State Farm has major claims or losses in reserves (investments) in 2016/17, not able to recoup their losses by “charging back” their clients?
This is a very “slippery slope” of increasing micro management and insurance regulation!
Assume CA DOI wants to decide on how much short term profit, premium to charge, commissions, expenses, investments are allowed for reserves, etc.
Can any agent ever be a real classical “independent contractor” (per IRS definition) when told what to do and where to go via this incremental creep of CA DOI control?
Why is the California Commissioner still a “political” office?
Enough is enough.
If these people don’t like State Farm’s rates, why don’t they just go to another carrier? Why all the fuss? Waste of time and money with only the lawyers getting rich in the end.
This group does not really care about State Farm rates. They get compensated at rates between $300 to $600 per hour to challenge filings. One of the many downsides of Prop 103 was enabling groups like this to collect this type of money which the policyholder ultimately pays out. It creates a corrupt system and enables the result detailed in the articles.
Carriers pay tens of thousands of dollars just for the review, even if it doesn’t turn into a formal intervention. I often wonder if consumers, who these groups claim to protect, realize they are paying higher insurance rates as a result of their “protection”.
The Consumer Watchdog and Judge may want to consider a longer horizon before using temperamental lingo like “overcharging”?
Assume State Farm has major claims or losses in reserves (investments) in 2016/17, not able to recoup their losses by “charging back” their clients?
This is a very “slippery slope” of increasing micro management and insurance regulation!
Assume CA DOI wants to decide on how much short term profit, premium to charge, commissions, expenses, investments are allowed for reserves, etc.
Can any agent ever be a real classical “independent contractor” (per IRS definition) when told what to do and where to go via this incremental creep of CA DOI control?
Why is the California Commissioner still a “political” office?
Enough is enough.