Archive for November, 2006

Donelon Calls on Allstate CEO to Discuss Company’s Plan to Shed Louisiana Coverage

Insured Ones,

I’m going to manfully ignore the insane report that Hank Greenberg and an unnamed billionaire want to buy the New York Times Co.  An exclusive by my pal Charlie Gasparino is here:  http://poynter.org/forum/view_post.asp?id=12073. If you can’t start your day without my opinion, go to the site, click “about” and search under “Greenberg.”

I’m also going to delay delving into the nuances of the Duval vs. Senter decisions in the Eastern District of Louisiana and the Southern District of Mississippi. Suffice it to say, there are differences in those wind-water cases. I’m also not sure we want to be wandering around in those weeds.

Today, I reach back to Louisiana DOI press releases over the summer to explain why states attempting to assert appropriate authority over insurers have no chance.  At the time of the above, Commissioner James J. Donelon had already announced probes into claims-handling practices of two insurers, including, I happen to know, Allstate.

But note that his real — and understandable — concern wasn’t whether Allstate was paying claims on policies it had sold. It was whether Allstate would agree to sell new ones, whether they were paying on the old ones or not.  I mean, let’s say for the sake of argument that the DOI found Allstate behaved improperly or even just performed poorly. Why would you allow them them back, let alone beg/demand they come back?

Because, I-SuperFriends, Louisiana needs Allstate much more than Allstate needs Louisiana. I don’t know how much Louisiana  homeowners’ premiums represent of Allstate’s $27 billion in ‘05 total property/liability premiums and $35.4 billion in ‘05 revenues, but I am here to tell you, it is a very small number. On the other hand, Allstate, State Farm and Nationwide dominate the homeowners’ market there, which, I am sure you can understand, is a mixed blessing, at best, these days.

And as boring as we all know insurance to be, nothing happens without it. No mortgages, no refinancings, no oil rigs, no casinos, no commercial fishing, no eeekcunuhmik devehluppmint, as Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., might say, and no Katrina recoveryYou just need it.

So note the drumbeat of DOI press releases and tell me what’s on Commissioner Donelon’s mind.

First, the market-conduct probe.
May 17:  “Consumer Complaints Lead to Probe of Hurricane Claims Handling Practices of Two Insurers

Then, Donelon announces that Allstate has demanded it be allowed to drop wind coverage in 18 coastal parishes or it would “leave the state.” Donelon says he’ll sue if they do that. That’s here:

July 21: Donelon Proposes to Invoke Regulatory Action in Allstate Matter

Then the commissioner publicly asks for talks with Allstate CEO Edward Liddy by name. If you read it, you’ll see he calls him “the Northbrook, Illinois-based Liddy.”  Right, fighting words. That’s here:

July 26: Commissioner Donelon calls on Allstate CEO to discuss company’s plan to shed Louisiana coverage

Then, he gets a meeting, but with Allstate’s president and COO, Thomas Wilson.

July 27: Donelon, Allstate president to meet Monday

Then, phew, Allstate agrees to reconsider (not change) its position.

July 31:  Statement from Donelon following his meeting with Allstate President

So the Louisiana insurance commissioner, who is hardly, and he would agree, a fire-breathing populist, had to threaten to sue and issue a press release to get a meeting with Allstate brass. And though Wilson is a very important guy there, symbolically, it’s not great that Liddy couldn’t make it.

How’s that Katrina market-conduct exam going, I wonder?

And here is question that is mostly rhetorical, but I’d like to hear opposing views:  In the Allstate-Louisiana relationship, who holds the whip?


http://www.ldi.state.la.us/public_affairs/Press_Releases/2006_Press_Releases/Probe%20of%20handling%20claim%20practices%205-17-06.htm

http://www.ldi.state.la.us/public_affairs/Press_Releases/2006_Press_Releases/Donelon%20calls%20on%20Allstate%20CEO%207-26-06.htm

http://www.ldi.state.la.us/public_affairs/Press_Releases/2006_Press_Releases/Donelon%20and%20Allstate%20president%20to%20meet%207-27-06.htm

http://www.ldi.state.la.us/public_affairs/Press_Releases/2006_Press_Releases/Donelon%20calls%20on%20Allstate%20CEO%207-26-06.htm

Lawsuit against insurers still alive

I-Fans,
As reported in the Pulitzer-winning Times-Pic and elsewhere, U.S. District Stanwood Duval Jr.(1) of New Orleans federal court declined to dismiss a lawsuit that claims insurers should pay for damage caused by water — both the kind that rises up (aka “flood”), as well as the kind that falls down (aka “rain”).  The defendant is Allstate.
The judge said that some policy language is “ambiguous.”  That means insurers lose because in insurance law, the tie goes to the policyholder on the principle that insurers wrote the policy and have the advantage (along with many others).  Lawyers, I trust, will help us understand “contracts of adhesion,” which I understand to be the take-or-leave-it kind.  Under that principle, if you write the contract and do a poor job, you’re stuck with it.
As the Times-Pic points out, this ruling contrasts with one in August by U.S. District Judge L.T. Senter in the Southern District of Mississippi, who found in the Scruggs(2) case that a policy didn’t cover flood from storm surges.  The Times story, however, says the La. ruling centers on man-made problems, meaning broken levees, as opposed to a surge, which is a “nat cat,” as we insurance lovers say.
Louisiana Lawyer Supreme points out that the Louisiana ruling comes earlier in the civil proceedings and is based on pleadings alone, not on any factual findings.  That differs from the situaiton in Missisippi, where the judge ruled after making findings of fact favorable to insurers (on that narrow point) in a bench trial.  I figure the Mississippi ruling is firmer. 
Both La. and Miss. are in the Fifth Circuit, which I suppose will sort this out.
What do I think? I hate this entire argument. Let’s see, we are jamming courts to parse whether water arrived via a wind-torn roof, a “surge,” which, let’s face it , doesn’t happen without a tropical depression  (”hurricane”),  an Army Corps of Engineers miscalculation, some badly written flood maps or something else.
I don’t care if it came through a straw. Are we covering storms, or what? Who benefits, exactly, from chopping up a storm risk into separate perils? I frankly don’t see how this helps policyholders or taxpayers.  Insurers? Seems like it. Lawyers? Definitely.  (Sorry, AKO[3]; Love you guys, but this stuff is ridiculous.)
Maybe insurance folks can help us understand here, but I don’t see the benefit.
Yes, insurers must protect their solvency and, sure, their shareholders, too. And of course it can be done. Stay tuned.
(1) Great name.
(2) Pascagoula trial lawyer, Richard Scruggs, famous for tobacco cases among many others.
(3) Anderson Kill and Olick, leading bad-faith firm.
Thanks also to Cool Texan.
Private note to Foxy Oregonian:  Mighty quiet out there.

Tweety: Moo-ah Tehwible, Tehwible HOYREEkanes is Comin’!

InsFans,
If you are new to this list, my condolences. And here, I’m trying to make a good impression, and I start off with a mistake. The headline I meant to run did not quote Tweety Bird. It was actually:
“Modeler RMS Reaffirms Hurricane Loss Projections Through 2011″
A leading industry consultant tells us that its “second expert elicitation,” held last month, says it’s going to be pretty bad out there the next five years. Preeeetttiieee bad.
“As part of our annual review of medium-term landfall frequency in the Atlantic, RMS held its second expert elicitation (see?) in October 2006, presenting a range of statistical models to a panel of seven of the world’s leading hurricane scientists,” said Joshua Darr, director of model management at RMS. …
“According to RMS, a key driver of the current elevated view of landfalling hurricane risk is an increase of more than 30 percent in the modeled frequency of major (Saffir-Simpson Category 3-5) hurricanes making landfall in the U.S., to account for current elevated levels of hurricane activity in the Atlantic basin that are expected to persist for at least the next five years. The increased frequency and intensity of hurricane activity in the Atlantic Ocean Basin, as observed since 1995, are driven by higher sea surface temperatures in the tropical North Atlantic and by associated changes in atmospheric circulation.”
I know you can’t get enough, so:

“Darr added that the experts also reaffirmed that the “increase in activity of the most severe Category 3-5 hurricanes will be higher than the increase in Category 1-2 storms, based on the high likelihood of warmer than normal sea surface temperatures in the tropical Atlantic.”

As Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., were he to turn into a Jewish grandmother, might say:  Gvalt!    Expoits’ are reaffoimin’ at formal elissiatay…elissytationins …at big conferences that the wind is about to hit the fan.
But don’t worry, this will not interfere with the spring 2007 release of RiskLink and RiskBrowser 7.0:
“While the forward-looking view of hurricane risk will not need to be changed in the spring 2007 release of RiskLink and RiskBrowser 7.0, there will be additional incremental updates for residual demand surge effects, continued advancements to storm surge modeling, and additional vulnerability classes, according to the company.”
Listen, I-Fans. I’m having a little fun at the expense of Josh and Risk Management Solutions Inc., which, from what I understand, is a good outfit. And for all I know, all hell is going to break loose in the next five years.
But here is a question that may show up during the annual ITP party/final exam at the Last Exit. In any case, you will be responsible for this material:
1. Based on the data in the above paragraphs, property insurance rates should:
a) Fall by 30%
b) Stay the same.
c) Fall, rise and fall in co-terminous increments, depending on the residual damage surge effects.
d) None of the above
e) All of the above
f) Rise, really really fast, again.
g)  Will there be an open bar?

Risk and Reward: Hurricane Losses Prompt Allstate To Pursue New Path

I-Folks,

This WSJ story from Friday is so disappointing I take the unsual step of pasting the entire thing below (it’s behind a firewall). Decide for yourselves, if you have a minute.

The subhed reads:


Cutting Coverage on Coasts, It Eyes Big Opportunity To Insure Boomers’ Lives — Challenges of a Personal Pitch”

The lede says that Allstate Chairman and CEO Edward Liddy didn’t bother asking even his own company to insure his South Carolina beach house because he knew it wouldn’t. I agree, it’s a nice lede.

This isn’t about lit-crit or journalist bashing, God knows. I don’t know Liam, but I do know he’s a fine reporter, and they have the best insurance reporter ever in Leslie Scism, now an editor there. But, I ask you, in the fairest-minded way, could not the Journal, even abiding by all the conventions of a national media outlet, have written a story under this fictional hedline, using the same set of facts:

Flashline: Take Money, Run
Mainhed: Raking Net of $7 billion-plus
Over Five Years,
Allstate Cuts Coastal Coverage.

Subhed: “Disastrous” ‘05 Net: $1.77 billion

Or, how about:
Risk? Reward!
Raking Net of etc.

After all, the higher your rates, the smaller your risk. Even a history major can figure that out. (And those heds are not as hard to write as you think, by the way.)

Here’s a nut graf. And, again, this is all in the name of broadening the discourse beyond the current (dumb) frames:

“On the housing front, Messrs. Liddy and Wilson say Allstate has little choice but to pare exposure to disaster-related losses and look for growth in other areas. The company is one of the top five home insurers in all 15 states curving along the U.S. coastline from Texas to Rhode Island, according to A.M. Best Co., a ratings service. It lost $1.55 billion in the third quarter of last year, largely due to the storms. Mr. Liddy’s annual cash bonus, which is tied to Allstate’s results, fell to $538,351 last year from nearly $3.7 million in 2004.

Allstate’s revenues have been climbing steadily in recent years, from $28.87 billion in 2001 to $35.38 billion in 2005. But its net income has fluctuated, climbing from $1.16 billion in 2001 to $3.18 billion in 2004, but dropping to $1.77 billion last year. This year, the industry is on track to report record profits, in large measure because of a hurricane-free storm season.”

I’m not going to belabor this because I don’t like web-based sniping at newspapers. But, I’m sorry, net income merely fluctuating in the worst-ever year? I mean, what do you expect? You are an i-n-s-u-r-a-n-c-e c-o-m-p-a-n-y. We had plenty of bad years at DJ, believe me. And, again, I apologize, but if you mention the industry is on track for record profits in 2006 ($60b), in large measure because of no storms, you should at least mention that the industry recorded then-record profits in 2005 ($43b) despite storms.

Again, where’s the risk? If Allstate, the most-exposed, least-reinsured insurer on the Gulf, gets hit with a calamity of this scale and shrugs it off, that’s a good thing. Just because they want to pretend it’s bad doesn’t mean you have to go along with it. I mean, right?

Listen, I-Fans, you’re a sophisticated group: check out this stock chart for ALL. Notice how the shares crash before 9/11 and go up afterward ? If you still think insurance earnings are driven exclusively, or even primarily, by insurance “losses,” you have not been paying attention, and you will regret it when we have the quiz/drinking game at the annual ITP party at Last Exit.

http://finance.yahoo.com/charts#chart4:symbol=all;range=my;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;logscale=on;source=undefined


Risk and Reward: Hurricane Losses Prompt Allstate To Pursue New Path — Cutting Coverage on Coasts, It Eyes Big Opportunity To Insure Boomers’ Lives — Challenges of a Personal Pitch
By Liam Pleven
1908 words
24 November 2006
The Wall Street Journal
A1
English
(Copyright (c) 2006, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

Even though Edward Liddy’s house in an upscale Chicago suburb is insured by Allstate Corp., he didn’t bother asking the company to cover his second home on the South Carolina coast. In this era of ruinous hurricanes, insurers have balked at protecting waterfront dwellings.

Mr. Liddy’s situation, however, is unusual. He’s Allstate’s chairman and chief executive.

Behind the twist is a big strategic gamble for Allstate, one of the U.S.’s largest insurers, which has been chastened by recent hurricane losses. As he seeks to reduce the company’s exposure to disaster losses, Mr. Liddy also wants his company to be a one-shop stop for middle-income baby boomers’ financial planning, using an army of 14,000 sales agents to push an increased number of life policies, annuities and other products.

Already, in many catastrophe-prone coastal areas, Allstate has stopped writing new homeowner policies and has dropped some existing customers altogether.

Driving the move are Mr. Liddy and his anointed successor, Tom Wilson, the company’s president, who will step into the chief executive’s office next year. Mr. Liddy will remain chairman. The pair has already worked together at a financial conglomerate in the 1990s, when they pried apart Sears, Roebuck & Co.’s loosely linked businesses, which included Allstate.

Persuading consumers to purchase life insurance is a far more personal proposition than selling auto coverage. Allstate will find itself in intense competition with a broad range of rivals. More immediately, Allstate has to persuade customers to consider the company even as it risks alienating policy holders by cutting back coverage in coastal areas.

Allstate, of Northbrook, Ill., insures roughly one out of every eight American homes and one in 10 cars. Together, these two businesses produce 68% of Allstate’s $35 billion in revenues, with the rest coming from the company’s existing life insurance and annuity business and other sources. Auto insurance is profitable but challenging, with competition from Progressive Corp. and the Geico unit of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. keeping prices low and limiting chances for growth.

On the housing front, Messrs. Liddy and Wilson say Allstate has little choice but to pare exposure to disaster-related losses and look for growth in other areas. The company is one of the top five home insurers in all 15 states curving along the U.S. coastline from Texas to Rhode Island, according to A.M. Best Co., a ratings service. It lost $1.55 billion in the third quarter of last year, largely due to the storms. Mr. Liddy’s annual cash bonus, which is tied to Allstate’s results, fell to $538,351 last year from nearly $3.7 million in 2004.

Allstate’s revenues have been climbing steadily in recent years, from $28.87 billion in 2001 to $35.38 billion in 2005. But its net income has fluctuated, climbing from $1.16 billion in 2001 to $3.18 billion in 2004, but dropping to $1.77 billion last year. This year, the industry is on track to report record profits, in large measure because of a hurricane-free storm season.

Earlier this year, Allstate dropped 27,000 customers in coastal counties in New York. In Florida, it shed 120,000 customers, on top of 95,000 customers in 2005. And it’s eliminating earthquake coverage for more than 359,000 homeowners nationwide.

“They showed me no loyalty,” says Isaac Axel. Mr. Axel says he had insured his home near the water in Brooklyn, N.Y., with Allstate since 1986, but was informed this year he was being dropped. Asked to comment, Allstate says it manages its business for the good of the entire company.

Amid the criticism, Allstate is pushing for the government to play a larger role in covering the homeowners it wants to drop. Specifically, the insurer is pushing for the creation of a “federal backstop” that would cover major losses in the case of disasters such as Hurricane Katrina. Mr. Liddy raised the notion with President Bush during a small event at the White House last year, and the company has committed $2 million in seed money to an organization that promotes the plan.

Allstate’s idea has roused critics in the industry, who say insurance doesn’t need more government involvement. Some point to the example of federal flood insurance, arguing that it perversely encourages people to live in risky places.

“There is plenty of capacity in the private sector to handle natural catastrophes,” says Ted Kelly, the chairman and CEO of Liberty Mutual Group, an Allstate competitor.

Allstate disagrees. For Messrs. Liddy and Wilson, the horizon appears considerably brighter for selling financial-planning products. It’s a fast-growing business for Allstate, but one it doesn’t dominate. Roughly 70 million baby boomers are expected to retire over the next few decades and many will turn to annuities to provide a steady income. With an annuity, a retiree makes an upfront investment and receives annual payments in return, along with certain tax benefits.

Financial-services companies have a mixed record of using one business relationship — an insurance contract, a credit card, a checking account — as a leaping-off point to establish another. Last year Citigroup Inc. finished unwinding an earlier effort to meld banking with insurance, selling its Travelers Life & Annuity Co. to MetLife Inc.

Allstate has seen new sales of financial-services products by its agents soar from $334 million in 1999 to $2.8 billion in 2005. Mr. Wilson ran the business from 1999 to 2002. He sees room for growth.

Becoming a one-stop spot for financial and real-estate services was also the aim of Sears in the 1980s, when it bought brokerage house Dean Witter Reynolds Organization Inc. and the real-estate firm Coldwell Banker & Co., and started the Discover credit card. It added those businesses to a stable that already included Allstate.

But while Sears focused on financial services, its core retailing business was flagging. Mr. Liddy and Mr. Wilson had to deal with the consequences. Mr. Liddy came to Sears in the 1980s, when Donald Rumsfeld sat on the retailer’s board. Mr. Rumsfeld had been Mr. Liddy’s CEO earlier in the decade at drug maker G.D. Searle & Co., where Mr. Liddy rose to become chief financial officer. In the same position at Sears, Mr. Liddy set about breaking up the company’s financial-services network. One of the people who helped him was Mr. Wilson, a young and rising investment banker at Dean Witter.

Mr. Liddy, 60 years old, is a gregarious former basketball player. Mr. Wilson, 49, is a runner who completed the Chicago Marathon last year. When the spinoffs were largely complete, Mr. Liddy left to become chief operating officer of Allstate. Mr. Wilson later moved with him.

Both men say what Allstate is doing is less ambitious than what Sears attempted. Sears made major investments in new businesses. “I don’t think we have to do those big bets,” Mr. Wilson says. Adds Mr. Liddy: “We don’t want to be all things to all people.” For example, Mr. Liddy says, it would be a mistake to sell individual stocks or bonds. By contrast, he says life insurance is an “adjacent product.”

Cross-selling life and property insurance has long been a challenge because consumers tend to see them differently. While car insurance is viewed by many people as a routine necessity, life insurance involves intimate decisions about lifestyle and family.

Tom Aromando, 50, of Ocean City, N.J., says that although his house is insured by Allstate, he has turned elsewhere for car insurance and life insurance. He “would consider” Allstate for other types of insurance, he says, but generally prefers to discuss life insurance with someone who’s looking at products from an array of companies. Allstate agents only sell Allstate life insurance, though they do offer some other companies’ annuities and mutual funds.

In a recent research report, William Wilt, an equity analyst with Morgan Stanley, said a consumer’s inclination to buy home and life insurance policies from the same company “seems to be on the decline.” In another report, Mr. Wilt noted that cross-selling rates of car, home and life insurance had “barely budged” in recent years.

“To those still clinging to the belief the rise of the financial supermarket is around the bend,” he concluded, “we say Fuggeddaboudit!”

Life insurance is a more predictable business than property, and at Allstate, its return on equity is lower. For the first nine months of 2006, the return on equity for Allstate as a whole was 23.2%, driven by car and home insurance. It was just 6.4% for the Allstate Life Insurance Co., the key part of the financial-services division.

Allstate considers one segment of the market for financial products sold by its agents particularly alluring: Middle-income Americans with a household income of $35,000 to $200,000, which it says is more than half of U.S. households. Allstate executives believe that part of the population is neglected by many financial advisers, who shoot for wealthier clients.

Allstate agents already sell car and home insurance — as well as some life-insurance products — to those customers it’s now targeting. Only State Farm has a comparable network of agents on Main Street. Many consumers say they prefer to plan for retirement with somebody they can meet face to face.

More than 40% of customers who have Allstate home insurance also have Allstate car insurance, according to a report by Mr. Wilt. “If we can crack this code, that’s going to serve us well in the long run,” says Mr. Liddy.

To build the business, Allstate is trying to boost the profile and training of its agents. Six years ago, few had licenses to sell securities, which are required for many annuity products. Now nearly half do, Mr. Liddy says.

Whether Allstate can succeed depends on how fluidly its agents can move from one product to another. Many in the financial-services industry, from life insurers to mutual-fund sellers, see the same wave of retirees and are preparing their own sales pitches.

Earl Gainey, an Allstate agent in St. Petersburg, Fla., says life insurance and annuities represent about 20% of his business, at least double the level from 10 years ago. Insuring homes has fallen from between 30% and 35%, he says, to less than 20% now, as Allstate has moved to reduce its exposure to hurricanes in the state.

Mr. Gainey says he was one of the first Allstate agents in Florida to get his securities license a few years ago. He says talking with a client about property insurance and life insurance are “two different conversations.” He tries not to sell them at the same time.

But Mr. Gainey says he might approach a customer who already has Allstate car or home insurance and ask if the person wants to know about life insurance or annuities. About 20% of those people agree, he estimates. Of those who do, he says, about two in five ultimately purchase some kind of financial-service product from him.


More Katrina Victims Are in Trailers

InsFans,

An AP post-Thanksgiving sob story (boo hoo) about ungrateful Miss. and La. whiners still living in FEMA trailers. But that’s Ok. There are only 99,000 of them, up from 34,000, for some reason. Listen, as long as we keep the figure under the century mark, I’m OK with it.

‘Thank God,’ Lessard said. ‘We can actually walk around, and we have a dining room table. It’s really nice. It has six chairs.’

Never mind who Lessard is. My point is, the woman has six chairs in that extra-big trailer. A chair hog! In my view, she should give up two — at least.

“The reason: Many people who were living with family members or staying in hotels at government expense last year have since moved out or been evicted. But they have been unable to return to their homes because they are still waiting for their houses to be repaired, their insurance to come through, or the water and electricity to be turned back on. Or they have yet to decide whether to rebuild at all.

See, and they’re indecisive chair hogs. The worst kind!

Say, uh, how many of the 99,000, do ya suppose, are “still waiting … for their insurance to come through”? How many of the people not living in FEMA trailers are “still waiting” for their insurance “to come through”? Here’s how many: None of your business. That’s how many. Leave that to the professionals. Certainly, don’t expect the La. or Miss. DOI’s to even, uh, ask? So, bug off. I’m sure those checks are coming through any day now.

Hey, can somebody get me a turkey sandwich? Is there a game on today, or what?

http://www.topix.net/content/ap/0370012052294823183700328615670475807770

No domestics on U.S. insurance industry’s list of safest vehicles

InsuredNerds,
As a pre-holiday bouquet, I offer this piece from a local TV station’s website that says the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that the top 13 autos for safety were all foreign-made.
This is not to crack on the U.S. auto industry, but to point out the good things that happen when insurance interests and public interests are aligned. Insurers push for auto safety to keep auto losses low, just as they push for better building codes and smarter zoning to control homeowners’  losses, and much more.  It’s a beautiful thing. I do wish insurers would push harder for improved doctor and hospital oversight to bring down medical-injury rates and malpractice suits. But that’s a column for another day.
Too often, though, insurer interests are in conflict with their customers’ interests. Insurers get to keep what they don’t pay out. It’s shareholders vs. policyholders, not entirely a zero-sum game, but close. Incentives to pay — regulation and litigation — are too weak  and are not efficient. They don’t work (however bold face obviously does). The friction costs are too high. (Sorry, Gene Anderson! (1); Sorry, John Garamendi!(2))
More importantly, the current insurance configuration — blind buyers fumbling with inadequate information — harms the public interest: it produces high costs for little insurance (see: health insurance); a massive anchor on the economy (insurance is 12% of GDP, an unholy number that costs jobs and kills productivity, up from 7.9% in 1960) and taxpayers are forced to pick up directly an increasing share of the costs and the worst risks (I’ll do a later blub on the costs of Katrina).
ITP says:  Give insurance buyers the information they need to reward the good actors(3). The market will take care of the rest.  Go Bears.
Again, counter-argument are always welcome. Come on, Triple I!
(1) Dean of bad-faith bar.
(2) Innovative and influential California insurance commissioner
(3) And while you’re at it, scrap state regulation and create national markets that spreads risk wider.

Group Names Former Ill. Insurance Director Vice President


Insured Pals,

Just a quick one today. This press release tells us that a former Illinois insurance regulator is about to join an Illinois insurance industry trade group.

What’s usual about that?  Nothing.  And that’s the problem.

If there is a revolving door that whirls as swiftly and efficiently as the one between insurance regulators and regulated, it must only be at Katz’s on Free Pastrami Day(1).

The Des Plaines, Ill.-based Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI) has announced that Deirdre Manna, former acting director of the Illinois Division of Insurance, will join PCI Dec. 4 as vice president of industry and regulatory affairs.

Prior to joining PCI, Manna served as a government relations  professional for Dykema Gossett, PLLC in Chicago, where she worked with all branches of government. As acting director of the Illinois Division of Insurance, Manna was responsible for regulating the state’s insurance industry’s market behavior and financial solvency. She led a department with a budget of $33 million and a staff of 336.”

A 1996 Money Magazine investigation found that 100 former state commissioners (the guys at the top) were then working in the insurance industry; that 15 percent of state legislators on committees overseeing insurance were either insurance agents, executives or otherwise connected to the industry. In Mississippi and Louisiana the figures were 40 percent and 38 percent, respectively.  Why am I relying on a 10-year old magazine story?  Did I mention no one covers this business?

Want something newer?  Robert Wooley, Louisiana’s insurance commissioner during Katrina, resigned in February to take a job with a law firm that lobbies the state legislature on behalf of insurance clients. In 2004, South Carolina Commissioner Ernest Csiszar stepped down and resigned as head of the regulators’ trade group, National Association of Insurance Commissioners, to become head of the industry’s trade group, Property Casualty Insurers Association.

I’ll leave it there. No, actually, I won’t. Folks, this is a system that has lost its way. And, yes (sigh), I will post any defense of this meshegas. I especially want to hear the one about how you need people who understand insurance.  Seriously, I’m open to counter-argument, but obviously deeply skeptical. The hopelessly snarled regulatory culture is Reason #139 that state regulation is a 19th Century relic that, as a policy matter, we can’t afford, and frankly, as an industry matter, they can’t afford.

(1) Ok, literal heads, there’s no revolving door, but there is a turnstyle.

 

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2006/11/20/74448.htm

State Farm Catastrophe Manager Invokes 5th Amendment

InsFolks,

There’s not much value I can add to last week’s Anita Lee piece in the Pulitzer-winning SunHerald.

But to summarize, State Farm’s catastrophe manager, Alexis King, invoked her Constitutional rights against self-incrimination during questioning from an Oklahoma lawyer. The lawyer,  Jeff D. Marr, is trying to prove that State Farm, which was found by an Oklahoma civil jury this fall to have breached its duties “intentionally and with malice” in dealing with 1999 tornado victims, did the same with Katrina policyholders on the Mississippi coast.

“She would not tell the attorney why State Farm ordered a second damage report on property when the first showed a policyholder’s losses were covered. Nor was she willing to discuss why State Farm went with that second report, finding little or no covered damage.

It happened after an Oklahoma tornado and, records show, on the Mississippi Coast after Hurricane Katrina.

‘Do you believe as a team manager - catastrophe team manager - that you owe any of either the policyholders in Oklahoma who endured their catastrophe of May 1999 or the policyholders who suffered losses in Katrina any type of apology?’ asked the Oklahoma policyholders’ attorney, Jeff D. Marr.

Same answer” (The Fifth)
Lee reports that King is a target of a Mississippi grand jury probe. State Farm is also a target of that probe and of another by the U.S. attorney in Jackson.

“…
Executives for the nation’s largest property and casualty insurer deny any intentional misconduct. They said the company worked with nationally recognized engineering firms to help determine what policyholders were owed in less than 2 percent of 84,000 Katrina claims in Mississippi.


First, I want to acknowledge the superb post-Katrina insurance coverage in the Biloxi/Gulfport paper, led by Lee, and by the Times-Pic, led by their star, Rebecca Mowbray. WSJ, step up and make that call!

Second, keep your eye on the gulf (ok, I’ll do it for you.)  If anyone thinks Mississippi AG Jim Hood, Rep. Gene Taylor, D-MIss., and Trent Lott (ahem, I mean, new Republican Whip Lott) are goofing around down there, you, my favorite Insurance Nerds, are incorrect. The same goes for the Louisiana Recovery Authority, which is paying (thanks, HUD!) residents up to $150,000 for money they didn’t get elsewhere, including from their insurers. The LRA could, theoretically, step into the shoes of more than 120,000 policyholders. That is a big deal. I don’t know if it’s like has ever happened before.

At some point,  I’ll explain why it’s almost impossible for states, especially poor ones like La. and Miss., to get tough with insurance companies. But for now, get back to work!

Oh, but before you do, how about a hat tip to Ohio State — and it kills me to say that.

Almost as importantly, the Person Familiar with the Situation responded quite trenchantly (is that spelled right? This Magyar keyboard makes things töügh) to last week’s cri from the Louisiana policyholder. It’s so on point, I’m savin’ it for later!  But if you can’t wait, don’t be lazy, go to the site, dudes, and look under “comments.”


http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/16024180.htm

Letter from an Irked Louisianan

Hi InsNerds,

This item, by an editor at the Pulitzer-winning Times-Pic, describes the rude surprise he received about his new homeowners’ policy and what he calls “the single biggest issue threatening to kill the coastal region’s chances for recovery:”  It’s subtle, but try to follow it.

“It’s the insurance, stupid.

In my own efforts to return to my beloved city and become a homeowner once again, I have come squarely up against the enemy. Forget about the 30 or 40 or 50 percent increases you’ve been reading about. The reality is far darker. Before Katrina, homeowners insurance at my home in Lakeview was $2,000 a year. Recently, I signed a contract to buy a new home in the much higher and drier University section of the city. Homeowner’s insurance on that home will cost me $5,300 next year. And now we discover that I could face a 58 percent increase on top of that. So according to the state, by 2008, I could be paying $8,374 a year for homeowner’s insurance, $6,374 more than I was paying in 2005.”

Obviously, a greedy whiner who doesn’t understand insurance.  C’mon, it’s only a (let’s see. hmm. multiply, divide, carry the two, scribble, scribble) 316% increase!  Geez, where’s your sense of humor?  Laisser les bon temps, etc. and all that? Better put somethin’ strohnng in that “go” cup, sunnyboy. I recommend Markey’s Bar in the Bywater. Plenty o’ likkah ova thaya.

Oh, and check this out: His carrier didn’t pay(FC).

“My Lakeview home was a total loss after Katrina, but the flood insurance settlement came from the federal government. My own insurance company paid me not one cent after taking into account the 5 percent “hurricane deductible” the industry imposed several years ago. I was insured with Travelers Insurance for 15 years and never filed a claim.
As Borat would say, “NOIYYYSE!” But the best part is, Louisiana Citizens (aka, “the government”) is now on the hook.

Today, Travelers, like every other insurance company in America, won’t sell a new policy to me, or anyone else in the New Orleans area.”

That leaves the innneeefishunt ol’ guv-run-mint. They can’t get anything right, rahg t? By the way, Louisiana Citizens must charge higher-than-private-sector rates by law.

Calling St. Paul(1), where they have no accents. Anyone care to take a crack at this one?

http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/otheropinions/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1163573049190480.xml&coll=1&thispage=1

And I would not be doing my clearinghouse duty if I didn’t link to:

1. The much bigger “insurance crisis” (not my words) in Florida.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/16021808.htm

2. The ad on the same Times-Pic page for the Allstate Sugar Bowl.  http://allstatesugarbowl.com/   Should be a good one. Maybe LSU will get in

Bonus link:  Times-Pic edit calling for Blanco to call a special session to take up, among other things, insurance.

http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/editorials/index.ssf?/base/news-3/1163573536190480.xml&coll=1

(Thanks to ITP Deputies, or “Little War Eagles”: Alabama Alum, Louisiana Supreme and Cool Texan)

Private note to my pals in the industry: Yes, today’s item was a little tough.  But, hey, it’s a debate! (This reminds me of the Sarah Silverman line: “I tell Asian people all the time. You gotta learn to laugh at yourselves.)  But seriously, don’t just take: Give! Anyone who chimes in with a response will be treated (1) respectfully and (2) if you like, anonymously.  (I will take care of you. Just ask my sources. Oops, you can’t because you don’t know who they are. But that’s the point, see?)

FC= Fairness Corner: In fairness, chances are Travelers didn’t owe, or owe much, on this policy. Lakeview was flooded, for sure. And let’s say there was minimal wind damage, assuming all facts in Travelers’ favor. The bigger point is, over time the industry has shifted the risks elsewhere (in this case, taxpayers), so the questions become, what justifies (1) leaving the wind market (2) the wind premium increases and (3) Given all this, how much risk is left in the private sector? That’s not rhetorical. I’d like to hear from the industry.

(1) HQ for St. Paul Travelers Cos. (ticker: STA)

There is No “I” in “Insurance,” except, um…

..ok, there’s one “I” in “insurance,” of course, the first one. But, from now on, that “I” includes me. You sabby, pilgrims?

Hello my fellow Insurance Nerds, you regulators, flaks, attorneys-general types, you Louisiana and Mississippi officials, insurance executives, tort lawyers, defense lawyers, book editors, newspaper reporters (hey, you got food on your tie again, ya’ fat slob!), magazine editors, friends, family, gulf-area policyholders and Other Uncovered Perils (ba-waaaaaang-ang-ang-ang

-angggggguh![gong sound]):

Herein, I announce, for about the third time, a new insurance blog that will answer several topical questions about the global insurance industry, including: If there’s an “i” in “insurance,” why is there no ” je” in the French “assurance“?  Are Gulf-area policyholders being treated fairly, post-Katrina?  ( Be honest, now.) If so, how can this be measured?  How come insurance buyers can’t find out which insurer is likelier to pay claims, the only thing anyone cares about, when we can learn the past performance of a zillion mutual funds? Is it true that the insurance industry is exempt from U.S. anti-trust laws ? Why?  If insurance is about spreading risk, why do we chop it into 50 different markets? How can Louisiana regulate giants like Allstate and State Farm, when Louisiana needs them more than they need Louisiana?  Is Krugman right when he says that 20% of health insurance premiums go somewhere besides paying claims? Why do we need four million agents and brokers?

And, finally, is whole life or term the best choice for a growing family (Ok, just joshing about the last one; I really don’t care.)

This blog will offer a daily dose of insurance news culled from the trade press and elsewhere, salted with my own witty commentary and innovative use of fonts and bold face. This site is about journalism, albeit with a point of view. It is about broadening the discourse on insurance and aims to involve the industry itself, along with many, many other people, laypeople and experts, insurers and insureds, people who sue insurers and people who defend such suits,  consumer advocates, academics, industry consultants, policyholders, policy-issuers and policymakers. In this, I share a common goal with my pals at the Insurance Information Institute and other industry groups.

However, you will notice a difference.

Who am I?  Most of you have met me at least on the phone, but for those who haven’t: I’m a humble freelancer, emphasis on the ” humble,” “free” and, I guess, um, “lancer.” But no bull. Many of you may know me from my eight years at the WSJ or from my time covering Spitzer and insurance for TWP. (If you can’t follow the initials, you are a media loser.) Others know me from my time as an investigative schlepper for the Projo, where we won both the 1994 Pulitzer for Investigations and the no-less-prestigious Poulette-zer, awarded by the National Poultry Foundation.

And, yes, I’m extremely witty.

Right now, I’m a Katrina Media Fellow sponsored by the Open Society Institute, a New York-based foundation started by my favorite Hungarian billionaire, George Soros. You will find about all that here:  www.soros.org. However, neither the OSI, its staff, Soros, his family nor his pets has anything to do with this blog. This is all me and only me. Give the guy a break. Neither does anyone else have anything to do with the Insurance Transparency Project, which is still just an idea. (More on that later.) For more on me, go to http://insurancetransparencyproject.com and click on “about” and “portfolio.”

A lot of people tell me, “Dean, we know all about the bling bling of combined ratios and the curvacious contours of the anti-concurrent causation clause — hell, we can get that in US Weekly, In-Style, SPIN and Vogue for Men. Why don’t you give us something about the really hot insurance news:  crop insurance, that kind of thing?

I say, “Fear not, my uncovered risks and underfunded liabilities.” In Insurance Notes! ™, you will learn more than who carves the turkey at the Greenberg thanksgiving; whether Mississippi Congressman Gene Taylor and Robert Redford were indeed separated at birth ; and whether Jacques Agrain(1), while on tour, really demands that red and white M&Ms be arranged in the shape of the Swiss flag.

The typical Notes! ™ will, unlike today’s, be short and pointed. It ask questions and make assertions intended to stimulate debate about one of the most-important, and I must say, and I’m sorry, worst-covered, industries in the general press. To my pals in the insurance industry, you may find what I say occasionally sharp, even critical. I can only say I mean not to offend, but to engage. I am wide open to counter-argument, and, especially, factual correction, and will indeed consider this project a failure if insurers feel excluded or insulted. If you think I’m anti-industry, you don’t understand this blog.

To my pals among the antis — tort lawyers, bad-faith lawyers, consumer advocates, etc. — you may, too, be off-put by some of my views. For one thing, I don’t think the answer to customers’ problems with their insurers is a million lawsuits or a swarm of regulators cranking out reams of market-conduct exams. But there will be no false “balance” here.  I think the antis are often, though not always, right.

I have my own crackpot ideas. The main one is this: There is (almost) nothing wrong with the industry that the market itself cannot solve — if insurance buyers are given better information. But with the secrecy that now pertains, the market cannot do its job of punishing the bad actors and rewarding the good. Much more on this to come (can’t wait!).

So, ya’ big lugs on both sides: come on out of your bunkers, join up with media hacks, government dorks, ignorant/greedy policyholders, and together let’s put the “fun” back in insur-fun-ance and fix what needs to be fixed and leave the rest alone. Remember, while it’s true there is an “i” in insurance, there is still no “i” in “team,” and that’s just a fact .

Note:  anyone wanting off this list, just ask. See warranty for details. Parts sold separately. ITP athletic apparel (men’s sizes XL and XXL) available at The ITP Store (Times Square, Westfield Shoppingtown Old Orchard and online)(2). Not affiliated with NAIC, SPIC, NCOIL, OSI, PETA or NAMBLA.

(1) CEO of Swiss Re. Seems to have a sense of humor. I made that up about the M&Ms.
(2) These are “jokes.” There is no warranty; there is no ITP line of apparel; there are no stores. And this is last time I’m explaining.