This.
Stop it!!
I think it is a reasonable request for people who post something from a report to include a link to the report. That way, we can decide and judge whether it is credible or not.
Don’t go all CS on us, Klaymen!
4 Likes
Chat gptsummary:
- Tokio Marine America Insurance Co. and Trans Pacific Insurance Co., subsidiaries of Tokio Marine Holdings Inc., are withdrawing from the insurance market in California.
- They will cease offering homeowners and personal umbrella insurance in the state, impacting 12,556 homeowner insurance policies and 2,732 personal umbrella policies.
- Nonrenewal notices for impacted policies will begin on July 1, with the proposed effective date for the withdrawals set for August 1, 2025.
- Reasons for the withdrawal were not disclosed in the documents, and Tokio Marine did not respond to inquiries from KTLA.
- Their withdrawal adds to a trend of insurance companies limiting or withdrawing business in California, making it harder for residents to obtain coverage.
- State Farm General Insurance Company previously announced plans to non-renew about 72,000 policies in California, affecting property insurance and commercial apartment policies, and stopped accepting new insurance applications for all business and personal property in the state.
Premiums in California plummet!!!
2 Likes
What’s your secret?
Gift of the gab mate
In general, you want to redirect to point out why you are right without directly telling the regulator “you’re wrong.” You don’t want to come off as confrontational.
2 Likes
How Insurers Game Out Disaster Risk and Drop Customers.
chatgpt summary
Insurers' Response to Increasing Natural Disaster Risks:
Insurers are raising rates and limiting coverage due to rising losses from storms, wildfires, and hurricanes.
CSAA Insurance Group refused to renew a policy citing wildfire risk despite a zero risk score.
Insurers employ scoring models to predict and manage risks, but concerns about fairness and accuracy persist.
Methods Employed by Insurers:
Two main methods used are scoring individual homes and catastrophe models to estimate disaster likelihood and cost.
Scoring and models aim to reduce losses and justify rate increases.
Challenges and Varied Results:
Different scoring models yield disparate risk assessments for individual homes or neighborhoods.
Wildfire risk can vary significantly within small areas due to various factors like vegetation dryness and land slope.
Role of Catastrophe Models:
California historically disallowed the use of catastrophe models to set rates, but this is changing.
Insurers argue models are crucial for assessing and pricing wildfire, flood, and other risks, improving insurance availability.
Need for Improved Models:
Insurers face challenges due to climate change, insufficient data on secondary perils like hailstorms, and outdated predictive models.
Advanced predictive modeling capabilities are lacking in a significant portion of the industry.
Regulatory Changes and Future Outlook:
California's plans to allow the use of catastrophe models aim to address the state's home-insurance crisis.
Insurers hope improved models will help in better risk assessment and rate setting post-catastrophes.
Think like a regulator
Yes this helps too for certain regulators. Certain people can come across as really hostile and difficult in SERFF notes, but you pick up the phone and talk with them and they are professional and helpful.
Doesn’t work for all obviously, but picking up the phone is a very important tool.
3 Likes
Yes, even if they are pants-on-fire up is down wrong, I never tell them that directly.
In general I try to reframe our positions to show that actually they agree with me.
Sometimes it’s clear that the person raising the objection is brand new, so you almoat have to view it as a training exercise.
2 Likes
Non renewal for “solar panels”…alleged alleged alleged…
Via bing copilot gpt:
Sounds to me like a boycott based on unreliable information, and insurance company boycotts are specifically prohibited by ratemaking laws.
I smell a class action case.
2 Likes
It’s California…that’s just how it smells.
3 Likes
According to my ex-co-worker my filing from November 2021 still isn’t resolved. To be fair we did shoot ourselves in the foot a bit (I can’t go into details but nothing to do with me) but even then it’s still ludicrous. Knowing I will never have to file in CA again puts a big smile on my face.
3 Likes
Are you including California? I was pretty good at getting rate filings approved, not perfect. But California took me about as much work as the other 40-some states combined. I think companies should track and pad into their expense load the sheer cost of complying with CA to get something approved.
4 Likes
You’d probably have to track time spent on compliance for each state regulator, with some formula to split time for your domestic regulator across all states you do business in.
That said, on a reporting side I think it’s fair to say that some states are effectively outsourcing to California. “Eh, if California is good with it then so are we.”
After making that comment, I thought to myself I should have a higher load in California but then the other states would deserve lower. But then, would I do that? Nah. Once an actuary always an actuary.
1 Like
It’s been a long time since I did a real California filing, but isn’t it in their wheelhouse to reject “excessive expenses”?
I did, however, give a verbal response to a Florida challenge of a minimum premium provision in a countrywide program filing by pointing out that, given the limited expected volume in the state, the cost of the filing was doing unkind things to our expected expense load.
1 Like