Easter means many things to different people, and to some it has no meaning at all.
The colloquial view is bunnies, colored eggs, baskets, new "Sunday" outfits and of course, shiny new shoes. Patent leather if you are a girl.
Just as Passover (Pesach) is a tradition with deep meaning for observant Jews, Easter (Pascha in Greek) is significant to Christians.
Both Passover and Easter are 8 day celebrations excluding Lent which starts 40 days before Easter.
This year Passover and Easter holidays overlap for the first time since 2012.
Perhaps it is more than just a coincidence.
from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2RtT93y
via
Saturday, 11 April 2020
Friday, 10 April 2020
Insurance Tips and trik auto insurance, auto insurance quotes, auto insurance companies, auto insurance florida, auto insurance quotes online, auto insurance america
Wednesday, 8 April 2020
Insurance Tips and trik auto insurance, auto insurance quotes, auto insurance companies, auto insurance florida, auto insurance quotes online, auto insurance america
The archetypical celebration of freedom and redemption, Passover, begins this evening.
Because of the pandemic, we have been forced to cancel our traditional - and highly anticipated - seders this year. But we can still enjoy this musical interlude from the Israeli Philharmonic:
חג פסח שמח
from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2y1Sy1W
via
Insurance Tips and trik auto insurance, auto insurance quotes, auto insurance companies, auto insurance florida, auto insurance quotes online, auto insurance america
We spend a lot of time dunking on insurance companies for boneheaded, sometimes egregious behavior.
So it's nice to also point out examples of good corporate behavior, as well. Like the folks at Companion Life:
[click to embiggen]
And they're not the only carrier behaving well. Our friends at OneAmerica Life have announced their CV-19 lapsed policy stance:
"If a life insurance policy lapsed AFTER the policyowner’s resident state issued a moratorium on lapses, then:
1. OneAmerica is automatically extending coverage on these impacted life insurance policies until June 1, 2020.
2. No action is required by you or the policyowner. It is automatic."
Nicely done!
But wait - There's more!
"Allstate and American Family Insurance have begun discounting car insurance premiums since many drivers aren’t using their cars as much due to stay-at-home policies aimed at slowing the spread of the coronavirus."
It's important to note that this is entirely voluntary on the carriers' part, with Allstate estimating their contribution at $600 million, and AmFam's at about a third of that.
But wait - There's more!
"Allstate and American Family Insurance have begun discounting car insurance premiums since many drivers aren’t using their cars as much due to stay-at-home policies aimed at slowing the spread of the coronavirus."
It's important to note that this is entirely voluntary on the carriers' part, with Allstate estimating their contribution at $600 million, and AmFam's at about a third of that.
And please let us know about how other carriers are stepping up - Thanks!
from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2Ro5XZ7
via
Tuesday, 7 April 2020
Insurance Tips and trik auto insurance, auto insurance quotes, auto insurance companies, auto insurance florida, auto insurance quotes online, auto insurance america
This:
December: Do you want health insurance?— Greg Fann (@greg_fann) April 7, 2020
29 million people: No
April: The government will cover COVID-19 costs if you remain uninsured, & other services you would use insurance for will be considered 'elective' and will be postponed. Do you want health insurance?#ACA #Obamacare
from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2JOzZ48
via
Insurance Tips and trik auto insurance, auto insurance quotes, auto insurance companies, auto insurance florida, auto insurance quotes online, auto insurance america
I know, I know, another Business Interruption post - enough, enough!
Except, well, not really:
To recap, Business Interruption coverage is supposed to help reimbursed lost revenue due to a covered, physical loss (such as a fire, or a flood, etc). The issue at hand is whether or not a business forced to close because of the current pandemic is entitled to such reimbursement, since the physical structure remains intact (and distinct from a claim arising from actual contamination). As we've previously mentioned, the answer would presumably be 'No,' but that has since morphed to 'potentially Maybe.'[LINK2]
/sigh
So there's been a loud hue and cry from affected businesses that are facing significant cash flow (as in, zero or very little) problems because they've been forced to close (or drastically pull back). And of course there's increasing pressure on The Powers That Be© to "do something."
But is this wise, let alone appropriate? What should the government's role in this conundrum be (if any)?
Well, let's set the Wayback Machine to almost eleven years ago:[LINK3]
"It’s still far from the norm, but governments around the world are becoming increasingly involved in providing terrorism reinsurance. In addition to catastrophe cover, some are addressing business interruption ... Government involvement has become necessary ... as private insurers and reinsurers would otherwise step back from these risks – either by reducing their exposure or eliminating it completely."
Please note that last: "eliminating it completely."
But is that what really happened?
Well, as our friend and P&C Guru Bill M tips us, pretty much:
"[M]ost companies will probably find it difficult to get an insurance payout because of policy changes made after the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak ... led to millions of dollars in business-interruption insurance claims ... As a result, many insurers added exclusions to standard commercial policies for losses caused by viruses or bacteria."
With the (predictable) result that carriers have what appears to be a bullet-proof claims-denial capability.
So, as with the airline and travel industries (among others), there's a concerted, vocal effort for government intervention:
"[P]roperty and casualty insurance companies are facing growing pressure to tap the industry’s $822 billion in cash reserves.
Lawmakers in New Jersey, Massachusetts and Ohio are considering forcing retroactive policy changes to cover coronavirus business-interruption claims."
Counter-balanced against that, of course, is the (inconvenient?) fact that such coverage was never underwritten, and for which no premium has ever been paid.
#WhatCouldGoWrong?
But is this actually necessary? That is, what if there already existed a policy to cover these circumstances? Surely these would sell like corndogs at the state fair, right?
"Pandemic business insurance — complete with virus coverage — is offered by the broker Marsh."
Oh, that's great! So problem solved, right?
Turns out, not so much:
"It launched its outbreak insurance in 2018.
A few companies in the hospitality and gaming industries showed interest.
But not a single policy was sold."
So, given that, is there some role for government here?
One more trip in the WMB:
"[T]he Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 to create a “temporary” federal backstop against catastrophic losses. This program subsidized private risk with public funds through a cost-sharing program for which the government does not receive any compensation."
So, government as BI backstop may yet be "a thing."
Guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Except, well, not really:
To recap, Business Interruption coverage is supposed to help reimbursed lost revenue due to a covered, physical loss (such as a fire, or a flood, etc). The issue at hand is whether or not a business forced to close because of the current pandemic is entitled to such reimbursement, since the physical structure remains intact (and distinct from a claim arising from actual contamination). As we've previously mentioned, the answer would presumably be 'No,' but that has since morphed to 'potentially Maybe.'[LINK2]
/sigh
So there's been a loud hue and cry from affected businesses that are facing significant cash flow (as in, zero or very little) problems because they've been forced to close (or drastically pull back). And of course there's increasing pressure on The Powers That Be© to "do something."
But is this wise, let alone appropriate? What should the government's role in this conundrum be (if any)?
Well, let's set the Wayback Machine to almost eleven years ago:[LINK3]
"It’s still far from the norm, but governments around the world are becoming increasingly involved in providing terrorism reinsurance. In addition to catastrophe cover, some are addressing business interruption ... Government involvement has become necessary ... as private insurers and reinsurers would otherwise step back from these risks – either by reducing their exposure or eliminating it completely."
Please note that last: "eliminating it completely."
But is that what really happened?
Well, as our friend and P&C Guru Bill M tips us, pretty much:
"[M]ost companies will probably find it difficult to get an insurance payout because of policy changes made after the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak ... led to millions of dollars in business-interruption insurance claims ... As a result, many insurers added exclusions to standard commercial policies for losses caused by viruses or bacteria."
With the (predictable) result that carriers have what appears to be a bullet-proof claims-denial capability.
So, as with the airline and travel industries (among others), there's a concerted, vocal effort for government intervention:
"[P]roperty and casualty insurance companies are facing growing pressure to tap the industry’s $822 billion in cash reserves.
Lawmakers in New Jersey, Massachusetts and Ohio are considering forcing retroactive policy changes to cover coronavirus business-interruption claims."
Counter-balanced against that, of course, is the (inconvenient?) fact that such coverage was never underwritten, and for which no premium has ever been paid.
#WhatCouldGoWrong?
But is this actually necessary? That is, what if there already existed a policy to cover these circumstances? Surely these would sell like corndogs at the state fair, right?
"Pandemic business insurance — complete with virus coverage — is offered by the broker Marsh."
Oh, that's great! So problem solved, right?
Turns out, not so much:
"It launched its outbreak insurance in 2018.
A few companies in the hospitality and gaming industries showed interest.
But not a single policy was sold."
So, given that, is there some role for government here?
One more trip in the WMB:
"[T]he Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 to create a “temporary” federal backstop against catastrophic losses. This program subsidized private risk with public funds through a cost-sharing program for which the government does not receive any compensation."
So, government as BI backstop may yet be "a thing."
Guess we'll just have to wait and see.
from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/34j5PPI
via
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)