Let’s see now…….exactly how much investigation should it take to consider damage to a BEACHFRONT HOME that took a dead hit from Katrina? Sounds like USAA got back doored on this one.
just like the tx mold cases, being forced to pay for uncovered claims when no premium was collected will cost us all $$ but the juries don’t understand it.
Like most of these cases, this one will be appealed and will go to the next court level where common sense, wisdom, and the appropriate interpretation and application of the law will prevail. Too bad the local jury system is such a sham…USAA no doubt has shelled out a fortune defending themselves while it costs the plaintiffs nothing to pursue them. What is wrong with this picture?
As a USAA member for over 46 years, I am appalled at this verdict – all of us Association members are “fined” when one member obtains funds which are not rightly owed under our contract of coverage. I do hope the prior post as to reversal on appeal is correct.
As an Insurance guys of 40 plus years, I am also appalled – but not surprised – at this ‘decision’ by a jury of southern mississippi yokels who are only looking out for one o their own (o so they think) with this kind of non-sense
Good job jury. This is a wake up call. Policy holders are paying thousands of dollars for perils that are not likely to occur. It is time the insurance companies start providing coverage for what the consumer wants, pays for, needs and expects. If an insurance company can’t afford to insure for the catastrophic event, then they shouldn’t be selling insurance. In truth, the consumer should not be expected to remember all the fine print in the exclusions. And who is “We”. Our premiums were going up anyway this is the nature of the insurance industry beast. WE NEED fewer insurance companies and less diversity, and real competition driven by the demand for service, coverage and rate. Right now you have too many companies not big enough to justify the business they are buying at too low a rate, which they fully intend to raise, because they’ll have to. Or if a catostrophic event occurs first they’ll simply go bankrupt. This in the long run drives up the rate for all insurance companies, putting many consumers at risk and effects the profitability for all.
Informed insurance buyers take the time to ask what coverage their policies cover. Flood typically isn’t covered in a Homeowners policy and even generally uninformed buyers know that….where was the mortgagee? Unless there is no mortgage, all lenders should require flood insurance and generally do.
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.
Thank you PJ
Sheltowee,
You do not have a clue what you are talking about…
Let’s see now…….exactly how much investigation should it take to consider damage to a BEACHFRONT HOME that took a dead hit from Katrina? Sounds like USAA got back doored on this one.
just like the tx mold cases, being forced to pay for uncovered claims when no premium was collected will cost us all $$ but the juries don’t understand it.
Like most of these cases, this one will be appealed and will go to the next court level where common sense, wisdom, and the appropriate interpretation and application of the law will prevail. Too bad the local jury system is such a sham…USAA no doubt has shelled out a fortune defending themselves while it costs the plaintiffs nothing to pursue them. What is wrong with this picture?
At least there will be no punitives.
Just felt like finding some kind of silver lining.
As a USAA member for over 46 years, I am appalled at this verdict – all of us Association members are “fined” when one member obtains funds which are not rightly owed under our contract of coverage. I do hope the prior post as to reversal on appeal is correct.
As an Insurance guys of 40 plus years, I am also appalled – but not surprised – at this ‘decision’ by a jury of southern mississippi yokels who are only looking out for one o their own (o so they think) with this kind of non-sense
Good job jury. This is a wake up call. Policy holders are paying thousands of dollars for perils that are not likely to occur. It is time the insurance companies start providing coverage for what the consumer wants, pays for, needs and expects. If an insurance company can’t afford to insure for the catastrophic event, then they shouldn’t be selling insurance. In truth, the consumer should not be expected to remember all the fine print in the exclusions. And who is “We”. Our premiums were going up anyway this is the nature of the insurance industry beast. WE NEED fewer insurance companies and less diversity, and real competition driven by the demand for service, coverage and rate. Right now you have too many companies not big enough to justify the business they are buying at too low a rate, which they fully intend to raise, because they’ll have to. Or if a catostrophic event occurs first they’ll simply go bankrupt. This in the long run drives up the rate for all insurance companies, putting many consumers at risk and effects the profitability for all.
It’s amazing how you all KNOW exactly what happened in that courtroom. Were you all there?
Informed insurance buyers take the time to ask what coverage their policies cover. Flood typically isn’t covered in a Homeowners policy and even generally uninformed buyers know that….where was the mortgagee? Unless there is no mortgage, all lenders should require flood insurance and generally do.