Pa. Agency Sued Over Alleged Failure to Suggest Flood Insurance for Beverage Company

May 23, 2005

  • May 25, 2005 at 6:59 am
    Devils advocate says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Armando, If insureds should not be responsible for reading their policies, then why should we waste time and money sending them one? I don’t believe any agent is willing to take on the responsiblity of making sure that ALL of their insureds know everything that they are exposed to, I am not suggesting that agents should not try to educate insureds, but we can not be held responsible for clients that should have known better, such as this case. It is sad if the agent did not get a signed release for flood coverage, but it is also 99% sure that the insured would have rejected the coverage simply due to cost and lack of adequate coverage provided by it. A mutli million dollar company with a large facility, and possible financing ( NOT SURE) I think there is more blame to throw around than just the agent. The CEO, CFO of the company itself and who ever brokered the purchase of the property could also have a little mud thrown at them. Armando I wander if your auto insurance agent has ever asked you about what your profession is, and did they offer you a quote for your business exposure or how about Work Comp? If not, with the right lawyer and your opinions, you could get rich. I am sure that even as an EXPERT WITNESS, I could find gaps in your coverage that are important and necessary. Who is to blame if you are not covered properly? Clearly you don’t think you should be held accountable to read your policy as a consumer. You might be good, But I hope your not one of my customers, I don’t need any more irresponsible customers. Don’t even try to suggest you are responsible, I am sure you have a policy, but have said it should not be your responsiblity to read it, attitudes like that breed problems. Why not buy a bare bones stripped policy and simply suggest that is what your agent offered so he is to blame for not selling you absolutely everything available. In my years in the industry, I have never ever had a client buy everything I suggested they buy. Should I refuse to insure at all, as I am aware they are not properly covered? I can just see the endorsement to my E&O (only provides coverage for claims that result from full coverage all risk policy transactions that leave no gaps in coverage to allow exposure to E&O claims)
    Again the fact is that agents must protect themselves against lawyers first and then help protect the insured if time allows. excuse me I have just discovered 63 new disclosures and releases I need to design to protect myself against the very people that I sell to, who should not be held accountable for any decisions they make about life. Thank God we do get signed releases on all policies we sell, but did I forget to offer the customer coverage for the sky falling? I hope I’m covered for that. Oh Wait, I’m an insured on my E&O policy, I don’t have to read it, I will just sue the agent that sold it to me, they should have offered me more coverage than they sold me, I’m sure of it. I did not sign any releases or declination of coverages when I took out the coverage, so I’m good to go.

  • May 26, 2005 at 10:15 am
    Darlene says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It’s not right…but the truth!



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*