So when does the insured take responsibility for his own life, business and coverages? The anology about the doctor is comparing apples to watermelons. Yes we are professionals, however before the insured buys anything it is his resposibility to educate himself on what he needs.
This defense of “He didn’t tell me” to avoid the resposibility of not reading his own policy or purchasing the coverages he should know he needs, is getting asinine. E & O should only be used for what it was designed for- mistakes. Mistakes in typing, mistakes in listings of coverages, or omissions of fees. Not as a scapegoat for an insured for the failure to take responsibility of his own insurance unto himself. Come on- when are people going to take some responsibility for their own screw ups and ignorance.
An agent should offer NFIP flood coverage to everyone in a participating community. Roughly, a quarter of all flood losses occur in areas that are not designated
“hazardous” by the Army Corp of Engineers. That being said, the NFIP policy excludes business interruption, the maximum limit for a commercial building is 500,000 on the building and 500,000 on the contents, and the loss settlement is depreciated. The beverage company may get some compensation but will it even equal their legal costs?
Do not assume or make insureds responsible for reading their policies. They do not and are not, and many professional agents and attorneys can’t understand the policies. Why make an insured responsibkle for knowing they are in a Special Flood Hazard Area? Most agents don’t know which zone their insureds are in. To suggest that agents shouldn’t be held responsible for errors such as not identifying an exposure and telling an insured that coverage is available is inane. Did the CNA policy provide any flood coverage? Virtually all standard property forms exclude flood damage and CNA’s policy would afford coverage only by way of a CNS-specific endorsement. True that no B.I. coverage is available from NFIA. As an expert witness in over 1,350 cases, I’ve seen it all – from both sides.
Granted, the agency in this case should know the area in which they sell and as a courtesy and somewhat as a duty, inform the customer that they should consider Flood Ins. But, it is beyond me how a company with considerable assets as well as resources would not have researched the location in which they decided to build a wherehouse. This to me puts more of the onus on the beverage company than the agency. This lawsuit, in my mind, is a feable attempt to avoid responsibility for a major screw up.
So when does the insured take responsibility for his own life, business and coverages? The anology about the doctor is comparing apples to watermelons. Yes we are professionals, however before the insured buys anything it is his resposibility to educate himself on what he needs.
The more the insured learns and knows, the less relevant we become and the more directr writers will emerge as the norm.
I try to educate my insureds, but I do that to show them that I am on their side. I am the knowledgeable person, I do not expect them to take the time to know our industry, or keep up with the ever changing landscape.
We are the professionals. The doctor example is no watermelon…we go to the doctor for advice that we do not have or may not understand.
Would you buy a million doller house without looking into whether or not it’s in a flood zone? It’s people like you that are fueling the responsibility flight in this country.
I assume it is my post, but will refrain from rebutting until I know for sure.
Nick- you mentioned the failure of a doctor to stitch up a patient; that is an after effect, one would have hoped before you go under the knife that you would have gotten a second opinion. The insured should have educated himself on what types of coverages he would need to avoid a loss- of any kind, and checked with another agent. One is before hand the other is after the fact- hence the apples to watermelons. I know we hate shoppers, however if it were my property yes I would have gotten a second opinion.
Most OIC sites have sections of the site designed for education consumers. So he could have gone there. Yes, help educate the insured, however where does help end and responsibilty begin?
(From JT’s response) Nick- you mentioned the failure of a doctor to stitch up a patient; that is an after effect, one would have hoped before you go under the knife that you would have gotten a second opinion. The insured should have educated himself on what types of coverages he would need to avoid a loss- of any kind, and checked with another agent.
JT: I will just say that the sale is to the operation as the non-advised coverage is to the suture.
I do think that people should strive to be more educated about what they do in life…but when it comes to such technical things, and even the sheer amount of things there is to know, we cannot expect it to happen. That is what we are here for.
We had a case at a former employer I worked for where a plumber had an Employee Dishonesty situation, to the tune of $40,000. He did not have coverage. Fortunately for us, we had documentation that we offered it to him. He bought the coverage after the fact. Now, one strategy to avoid any suits such as the “Beverage Company” scenario is to choose a client base that IS educated and savvy enough to work WITH us.
I just feel that if we as agents project an aire of indifference to a situation such as the article presents, we are in danger of making our industry irrelevant. I feel that the independent agency system is in danger, what with the internet and the capabilities this offers companies to go direct. Geico is a concern on the P/L side, since they are so successful in practice and especially in marketing.
I know C/L agents have a stronger foothold, but I have seen solicitations from my bank offering C/L coverages. I just feel that we need to take our trade more seriously. I have seen many agents, and I do not think anyone here fits this description, that have an attitude of ‘coasting’ to retirement. The talent pool in the independent agency system, again from what I have seen, is not very deep either. I worked with someone who failed the licensing test 5 times…but is still going to try until passing. Many others I have seen come and go never had any experience with insurance aside from purchasing a policy (let alone reading one).
The sad truth is that in a case such as this, it is our job to secure the protections our clients need. We are the advisor.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
So when does the insured take responsibility for his own life, business and coverages? The anology about the doctor is comparing apples to watermelons. Yes we are professionals, however before the insured buys anything it is his resposibility to educate himself on what he needs.
This defense of “He didn’t tell me” to avoid the resposibility of not reading his own policy or purchasing the coverages he should know he needs, is getting asinine. E & O should only be used for what it was designed for- mistakes. Mistakes in typing, mistakes in listings of coverages, or omissions of fees. Not as a scapegoat for an insured for the failure to take responsibility of his own insurance unto himself. Come on- when are people going to take some responsibility for their own screw ups and ignorance.
An agent should offer NFIP flood coverage to everyone in a participating community. Roughly, a quarter of all flood losses occur in areas that are not designated
“hazardous” by the Army Corp of Engineers. That being said, the NFIP policy excludes business interruption, the maximum limit for a commercial building is 500,000 on the building and 500,000 on the contents, and the loss settlement is depreciated. The beverage company may get some compensation but will it even equal their legal costs?
Do not assume or make insureds responsible for reading their policies. They do not and are not, and many professional agents and attorneys can’t understand the policies. Why make an insured responsibkle for knowing they are in a Special Flood Hazard Area? Most agents don’t know which zone their insureds are in. To suggest that agents shouldn’t be held responsible for errors such as not identifying an exposure and telling an insured that coverage is available is inane. Did the CNA policy provide any flood coverage? Virtually all standard property forms exclude flood damage and CNA’s policy would afford coverage only by way of a CNS-specific endorsement. True that no B.I. coverage is available from NFIA. As an expert witness in over 1,350 cases, I’ve seen it all – from both sides.
Granted, the agency in this case should know the area in which they sell and as a courtesy and somewhat as a duty, inform the customer that they should consider Flood Ins. But, it is beyond me how a company with considerable assets as well as resources would not have researched the location in which they decided to build a wherehouse. This to me puts more of the onus on the beverage company than the agency. This lawsuit, in my mind, is a feable attempt to avoid responsibility for a major screw up.
So when does the insured take responsibility for his own life, business and coverages? The anology about the doctor is comparing apples to watermelons. Yes we are professionals, however before the insured buys anything it is his resposibility to educate himself on what he needs.
The more the insured learns and knows, the less relevant we become and the more directr writers will emerge as the norm.
I try to educate my insureds, but I do that to show them that I am on their side. I am the knowledgeable person, I do not expect them to take the time to know our industry, or keep up with the ever changing landscape.
We are the professionals. The doctor example is no watermelon…we go to the doctor for advice that we do not have or may not understand.
Nick
Would you buy a million doller house without looking into whether or not it’s in a flood zone? It’s people like you that are fueling the responsibility flight in this country.
I assume it is my post, but will refrain from rebutting until I know for sure.
Nick
It’s people like you that are fueling the responsibility flight in this country.
One comment:
The fact that an agent would be appauled about not suggesting coverage to an insured (ie…our job) seems to me to be a case of responsibility flight.
Nick
Nick- you mentioned the failure of a doctor to stitch up a patient; that is an after effect, one would have hoped before you go under the knife that you would have gotten a second opinion. The insured should have educated himself on what types of coverages he would need to avoid a loss- of any kind, and checked with another agent. One is before hand the other is after the fact- hence the apples to watermelons. I know we hate shoppers, however if it were my property yes I would have gotten a second opinion.
Most OIC sites have sections of the site designed for education consumers. So he could have gone there. Yes, help educate the insured, however where does help end and responsibilty begin?
Bravo- very well said
(From JT’s response) Nick- you mentioned the failure of a doctor to stitch up a patient; that is an after effect, one would have hoped before you go under the knife that you would have gotten a second opinion. The insured should have educated himself on what types of coverages he would need to avoid a loss- of any kind, and checked with another agent.
JT: I will just say that the sale is to the operation as the non-advised coverage is to the suture.
I do think that people should strive to be more educated about what they do in life…but when it comes to such technical things, and even the sheer amount of things there is to know, we cannot expect it to happen. That is what we are here for.
We had a case at a former employer I worked for where a plumber had an Employee Dishonesty situation, to the tune of $40,000. He did not have coverage. Fortunately for us, we had documentation that we offered it to him. He bought the coverage after the fact. Now, one strategy to avoid any suits such as the “Beverage Company” scenario is to choose a client base that IS educated and savvy enough to work WITH us.
I just feel that if we as agents project an aire of indifference to a situation such as the article presents, we are in danger of making our industry irrelevant. I feel that the independent agency system is in danger, what with the internet and the capabilities this offers companies to go direct. Geico is a concern on the P/L side, since they are so successful in practice and especially in marketing.
I know C/L agents have a stronger foothold, but I have seen solicitations from my bank offering C/L coverages. I just feel that we need to take our trade more seriously. I have seen many agents, and I do not think anyone here fits this description, that have an attitude of ‘coasting’ to retirement. The talent pool in the independent agency system, again from what I have seen, is not very deep either. I worked with someone who failed the licensing test 5 times…but is still going to try until passing. Many others I have seen come and go never had any experience with insurance aside from purchasing a policy (let alone reading one).
The sad truth is that in a case such as this, it is our job to secure the protections our clients need. We are the advisor.