| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
 Posted - 03/23/2004 : 16:06:39
|
| Nah...I've got too much crap around here as it is. Who wants to go in with me on a homongus yard sale? |
 |
|
|
Reconstruction Man
124 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2004 : 17:52:31
|
JimF,
The EU has large question marks about Lloyds. How do you feel about the position regarding Lloyds [EU] Names?
Also, the potential of Lloyds outstanding claims [i]not[/i] being honored after
1-1-2005 has the makings for some interesting market "corrections".
The social, political, emotional and ethical implications of those stories, contained within those links, affect us all in so many, many different ways...
|
|
|
|
JimF
USA
1014 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2004 : 18:28:00
|
Recon Man, just so you're clear on what I am trying to say. Let me say this about that: Lloyds is not on my Top 100 List of 'Things To Worry About'.
There is really no need in both of us staying up all night worrying about things over which we have no control, so on my behalf, she's all yours to enjoy fussing and fretting about!
Besides. I don't have all that much hair left to pull out! |
Edited by - JimF on 03/23/2004 18:35:52 |
|
|
|
Tom Toll
USA
154 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 10:55:21
|
| I agree with Jim, Lloyds is a proponderance of nightmares, and I do not wish to have a nigthmare. We have no control over the Lloyds bunch, so why fret. I sometimes wonder if they even know what they are doing. The English are like that you know. |
Edited by - Tom Toll on 03/24/2004 10:58:03 |
|
|
|
alanporco
USA
112 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 16:50:54
|
| The English know exactly what thet're doing - making MONEY! Lloyds has been at it for about 300 years. I've not read any of the articles re: Lloyds demise. However, Lloyds has had ups and downs over its history and will continue to do so. Two things to remember here: (1) the Names are all very rich, very powerful people and (2) corporate accounting is the biggest sham in the world (i.e., Enron, Paramalt (italy), etc.). The only possible effect on CAT adjusters might be that the purse strings are tightened at some CATs. The constant assault on fee bills will continue until the carriers are fat with profits again. This industry is cyclical. |
|
|
|
aagreen
USA
3 Posts |
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2004 : 08:38:50
|
Goodness, we should get out and rake the sand in the playground and put a tarp or two over some burnt grass; as the venerable CADO has been mentioned in news dispatches.
It was refreshing to see Andy carry the cause of the cat adjuster to the public, as another slant on the issue in question; and that two of our starting line-up were quoted at some length. |
|
|
|
katadj
USA
315 Posts |
|
|
katadj
USA
315 Posts |
|
|
fivedaily
USA
258 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2004 : 16:56:21
|
My question to the senator is, "why do people spend money on something and not know what they've bought?" It seems to me that some of the problems in Maryland stem from consumers who made no effort to understand what their money got them when they purchased the policy. Our homes are too big of investment to let some agent get away with "trust me."
Of course, what the heck are agents doing selling a policy they don't understand? This is my pet peeve even on a simple homeowners policy.
Some of the reforms suggested are a very good idea and some of the rest no such good ideas.
Jennifer |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2004 : 18:20:09
|
I just think it is hilarious that when a bunch of east coast liberals get their houses flooded it is a federal case, but when there is flooding in flyover country you never hear a thing about it. Just give them their tiny flood insurance checks and let them figure out how to pay for the rest.
If it weren't for federal flood insurance these people wouldn't have any flood insurance at all and then they have the nerve to complain about it. This is why we now live in a welfare state. For some people nothing is ever enough. |
|
|
|
LarryW
USA
126 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2004 : 20:56:49
|
| Kile: I guess this flood insurance program which started in 1968 finally had to deal with a flood for folks who live very close to Washington D.C. Any bets on how the flood insurance policy will change? Notice all the criticism is towards the "companies who sell it", the agents who sell it, or the adjusters who handle it? Maybe the federal government should just get out of (and stay out of) the insurance business? Perhaps insurance professionals should be left to insure losses deemed to be insurable. My suggestion is that if the federal government wants to provide flood (or any other kind of insurance)then they should hire their own adjusters, make them civil service employees, and handle their own business. That is probably not likely to happen though since the write your own carriers get a percentage of the premium for writing the policy, and another (I think the percentage is) 22% of the adjusting fee bill to handle the claim. And we think the I/A companies take a big chunk? If you work a flood claim (for the sake of example) and the billing based on the flood pay schedule is $100.00, your cut as the adjuster is $60.00 (remember this is an example), the real billing (which we never see)is $122.00. You are working for 49% of what NFIP is paying to have the claim handled if working for a WYO carrier. And many adjusters want to quibble over the difference of 60% vs. 65%. |
Larry Wright |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2004 : 23:20:05
|
Larry, the example you give at the bottom of your post, can be equally equated to a vendor / carrier billing situation on other than flood claims.
Many vendors charge an administration / office fee on top of the flat fee (as determined by the gross loss). There are many examples, as bad or worse, where the adjuster is making 49% or less than the carrier actually pays for the loss expense on a fee schedule handled claim. |
|
|
|
Todd Summers
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2004 : 23:26:32
|
| That is really sad. |
|
|
|
johnpostava
USA
35 Posts |
Posted - 03/31/2004 : 10:10:38
|
| As most of you know, we do a lot of flood claims. WYO's and Servicing Agents do not "mark up" the service bills we submit for payment. According to the WYO Agreement, WYO's recieve a percentage of the claim payout for each claim they generate. The larger the payout, the larger fee is recouped by the WYO carrier. Similarly, the larger the claim the larger the fee schedule for the adjuster. As I attempted to explain these facts to the Baltimore Sun reporter, there is absolutly no incentive for either the adjuster or the WYO carrier to underestimate the loss (with any software product). Of course, these facts did not make it into the 3/12 article which only told half the story. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
"Isabel", is a Hot Potato headed behind?
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
