I think the more important issue is consistency in loss handling. Depending on which office handles your loss, the value and even the coverage interpretation can vary widely.
The survey is very interesting and the insurance industry as a whole is looking at how to adapt to rapidly changing technology. Some are embracing new ideas and procedures more readily than others. There are pros and cons to having multiple people handling a claim file. An insurance claims department can more rapidly adapt and expand by having the claims representatives specialize in certain types of claims procedures. It takes years to train a claim representative and give them enough experience to become completely proficient in handling all aspects of claims. But at the same time it can make it confusing for the person making the claim to have to deal with multiple people handling different parts of the claim. As far as the publics perception that they obtained fair settlements goes the underlying problem there is that many people do not really understand their insurance policies and what is covered. Their expectations of what is fair are unrealistic and frequently they have some family member, friend or worse still attorney telling them what the claim is worth and at the same time telling them to expect to be ripped off by the insurance company. Even after the claim representative explains the settlement the person can still feel cheated because of the opinions of these other know it alls. It would be interesting if as part of the survey you could go back and look at the claim file for each person who said they had some negative experience and see how the claim was really handled. Then do a seperate study of how many of the negative opinions were justified. It would also be interesting to note how many of the people who complained were actually engaged in some level of insurance fraud. Its been my experience that the people who complain the loudest are actually engaged in some sort of dishonest activity themselves.
The good old days when claims adjusters had to eye ball the insured/claimant there was less dissatisfaction. Insurance carriers have sacrificed public relations and satisfaction by listening to the bean counters. When was the last time a claim was handled in person when it really counted other than the catasrophe.
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.
I think the more important issue is consistency in loss handling. Depending on which office handles your loss, the value and even the coverage interpretation can vary widely.
The survey is very interesting and the insurance industry as a whole is looking at how to adapt to rapidly changing technology. Some are embracing new ideas and procedures more readily than others. There are pros and cons to having multiple people handling a claim file. An insurance claims department can more rapidly adapt and expand by having the claims representatives specialize in certain types of claims procedures. It takes years to train a claim representative and give them enough experience to become completely proficient in handling all aspects of claims. But at the same time it can make it confusing for the person making the claim to have to deal with multiple people handling different parts of the claim. As far as the publics perception that they obtained fair settlements goes the underlying problem there is that many people do not really understand their insurance policies and what is covered. Their expectations of what is fair are unrealistic and frequently they have some family member, friend or worse still attorney telling them what the claim is worth and at the same time telling them to expect to be ripped off by the insurance company. Even after the claim representative explains the settlement the person can still feel cheated because of the opinions of these other know it alls. It would be interesting if as part of the survey you could go back and look at the claim file for each person who said they had some negative experience and see how the claim was really handled. Then do a seperate study of how many of the negative opinions were justified. It would also be interesting to note how many of the people who complained were actually engaged in some level of insurance fraud. Its been my experience that the people who complain the loudest are actually engaged in some sort of dishonest activity themselves.
The good old days when claims adjusters had to eye ball the insured/claimant there was less dissatisfaction. Insurance carriers have sacrificed public relations and satisfaction by listening to the bean counters. When was the last time a claim was handled in person when it really counted other than the catasrophe.