The Florida Insurance Dept makes it sound like they can\’t do much to stop this company\’s ILLEGAL actions. What is up with that? The commissioner should be using every rule in his/her arsenal to make Poe take care of the customers. Suggesting that they go to Citizens doesn\’t seem to be much of an option.
\”[Florida] State law requires insurers to wait 90 days after a home is repaired before dropping a policy.\”
Would Poe\’s legal department not know about such a business move?
Can insurers recklessly endanger people with such conduct?
What possible advantage would there be to ignore the law?
Can a company anticipate future legal action, that will put them \”out-of-business\” so-to-speak, in certain market segments, so as to cut future investment loss potential, in a publically [perceived] legalistic manner?
Would the company not be recklessly endangering people if they renewed the 100,000 plus policies knowing they do not have the capital to pay future losses…You know, if something like a hurricane hit the state?
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.
The Florida Insurance Dept makes it sound like they can\’t do much to stop this company\’s ILLEGAL actions. What is up with that? The commissioner should be using every rule in his/her arsenal to make Poe take care of the customers. Suggesting that they go to Citizens doesn\’t seem to be much of an option.
4-24-2006
\”[Florida] State law requires insurers to wait 90 days after a home is repaired before dropping a policy.\”
Would Poe\’s legal department not know about such a business move?
Can insurers recklessly endanger people with such conduct?
What possible advantage would there be to ignore the law?
Can a company anticipate future legal action, that will put them \”out-of-business\” so-to-speak, in certain market segments, so as to cut future investment loss potential, in a publically [perceived] legalistic manner?
rogerpoegc@yahoo.com
Would the company not be recklessly endangering people if they renewed the 100,000 plus policies knowing they do not have the capital to pay future losses…You know, if something like a hurricane hit the state?
4-25-2006
Isn\’t necessarily discontinuing coverage, quite different from…
1. Dropping policies illegally.
2. Contempt of the rule of law.
3. Turning one\’s back on trusting clients.
…?
rogerpoegc@yahoo.com