Home Insurance Information

–Saving on Nevada Homeowners Insurance 

Increase Your Deductible:  A deductible is the amount of money you pay on a loss before your insurance company pays for a claim. The higher you set your deductible, the more money you can save off the premium. Currently insurance companies recommend a minimum deductible of $500. Ask your agent how much you would save if you went with a $1000 deductible.  A deductible is the portion of any claim that is not covered by an insurance provider. 

Rebuilding Costs:  Many times people think they need to insure their house for the amount the amount purchased.  This is not the case. If your house were to completely burn down, you would still have the land. Your agent will be able to help you calculate replacement cost of the house.

Multi-Policy Discount:  Consider purchasing auto and homeowners insurance from the same company as most companies will give a multi-line discount.

Home Security:  Many insurance companies will give a discount for smoke detectors, burglar alarms and dead-bolt locks. Some companies will also give a discount for sprinkler systems.

Good Credit Helps:  Insurance companies are using credit scoring more and more to determine premium on homeowners insurance.

Private Insurance:  If you live in a high-risk area and have been buying your insurance through a government plan, you should check with an insurance agent. You may find that there are steps you can take to buy insurance at a lower price in the private market.

Understanding Credit:  Did you know that most insurance companies today will run your credit report when calculating your premium for homeowners insurance? That’s why it’s so important to understand your credit score and how to improve it.

Search for homeowners insurance agents in Nevada for a free rate quote on your homeowners insurance today.

Daren operates http://www.insuremyhouse.com and http://www.insuremylife.org both local insurance agent directories. The sites are organized by state and then zip code.

Anthem Blue Cross, the trade name for Blue Cross of California, is notifying about 230,000 members and applicants for insurance that a Web site used to apply for individual health insurance policies was breached.

The insurer says attorneys working on a class action lawsuit were able to access medical information and credit card and Social Security numbers, among other information, because all security mechanisms were not reinstated following an October 2009 upgrade.

An attorney representing affected individuals told the Associated Press that the information was not secure for five months. What follows is a statement that Anthem Blue Cross has issued:

“Anthem Blue Cross is committed to protecting the privacy and security of our members’ and applicants’ personal information, in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.

“We recently learned of a situation in which a small number of individuals manipulated the web address (URL) within the web site we use to allow people applying for individual insurance to track the status of their insurance applications. Through this manipulation, some of these individuals gained unauthorized access to certain private information. The vast majority of such manipulation and the resulting unauthorized access occurred at the hands of certain attorneys (representing an applicant). We believe that this manipulation was conducted to support a class action against Anthem Blue Cross and/or its parent company—over the very breach being committed.

“The ability to manipulate the web address (URL) was available for a relatively short period of time following an upgrade to the system. After the upgrade was completed, a third party vendor validated that all security measures were in place, when in fact they were not. As soon as the situation was discovered, we made the necessary security changes to prevent it from happening again.

“We have requested both by letter and in court filings that the attorneys return all information improperly obtained from the individual application system and as a result, that information has been delivered to a court approved custodian who will ensure its security.

“We have worked since discovery of this matter to analyze the data in an effort to identify all individuals whose information may have been impacted and prepared to communicate directly to affected members and applicants as soon as possible. As stated above, all information acquired by the attorneys has been transferred to the court’s custodian and beyond that, we have received no indication that any other information accessed has been used inappropriately.

“Out of abundance of caution, all appropriate applicants will receive a detailed notification from Anthem Blue Cross explaining what happened, and will be offered identity protection services for one year at no cost.

“We are currently weighing our legal options with respect to the data, the impact – if any – on our members, and the remediation costs incurred as a result of these actions.”

This article was reprinted with permission from Health Data Management.

Home Insurance consumer advocates United Policyholders (UP) gives other common examples of the ways in which an adjuster might fail to properly scope the loss. Windows need to be replaced, but the adjuster fails to separately specify the need to replace wood trim on the inside of the windows. The measurements of the room are taken inaccurately or rounded down; since the drywall, paint, baseboard, and floor coverings, and the electrical, heating, and air-conditioning costs will be based on room dimensions, underestimating here will result in an unreasonably low estimate.

Measuring the damage

Measurements may be taken accurately but may not account for waste, particularly where more material is needed to match complex color combinations or borders in carpeting, vinyl flooring, or wood flooring.9 Adjusters may calculate the dimensions of a wall and then deduct the area of cutouts for doors and windows even though those cutouts may increase, not decrease, the cost of repair; the drywall removed for a window opening cannot be used elsewhere, and it takes more time to paint around an opening than to paint a solid wall.

What are the home insurance trends?

Problems in scoping the extent of a loss sometimes result from industry trends. Trade publications, training courses, and word of mouth spread “common wisdom” among adjusters from different companies, and policyholder advocates report seeing many companies adopt the same unfair scoping tactics at the same time. The concept of an “abandoned floor” is one recent example. A homeowner suffers a plumbing leak that is included in the policy. Water from the leak inundates a room in which wall-to-wall carpeting covers a hardwood floor. Many insurance companies have taken the position that the hardwood floor is abandoned because its sole value is to provide a base for the carpeting; therefore, paying for the water damage requires only replacing the carpeting and providing a cheap underlayment of particleboard rather than also replacing the hardwood floor. Of course, if the homeowner someday would prefer to have hardwood floors rather than wall-to-wall carpeting, he will have to pay for the installation of a new floor; at that point, the homeowner realizes that the insurance company has not honored its promise to fairly adjust the claim and indemnify the homeowner for his loss. The difference can be substantial.

Home insurance claim example

One Pennsylvania homeowner was offered four thousand dollars by his insurance company to adjust a water loss in precisely these circumstances; after pursuing the claim with the aid of a public adjuster he ultimately received $15,000 as the frill measure of his loss. .(A public adjuster is an independent adjuster not employed by an insurance company who is hired by a policyholder to help with a claim.)

The abandoned floor problem illustrates several problems with the process of scoping property losses. The homeowner files a claim for the damaged floor, and the adjuster responds that the value of the hardwood floor is not covered under the obscure, legal-sounding concept of an “abandoned floor”. The homeowner may question the decision, and the adjuster responds that this is an accepted interpretation and “all the companies do it” (which may well be true, at least when they can get away with it). At this point the homeowner suffers from two disadvantages. The adjuster is, or at least appears to be, the expert, and without expertise it is difficult to contest his argument. Nor is it necessarily easy to get a real expert to contest the decision.

Insurance lesson learned

The difference in the Pennsylvania claim was $11,000, enough to justify hiring a lawyer or public adjuster. But on many claims the difference will be smaller. If the difference is a few hundred or even a few thousand dollars, it will not be worth it to hire professional help, so the adjuster’s improper determination of the loss will go unchallenged. The homeowner has not received what the insurance company promised, but it’s only a few hundred or a few thousand dollars. The insurance company has benefited by those relatively few dollars, but a few dollars on a lot of claims add up to a lot of dollars.

Part of the problem with scoping a loss is the degree and range of expertise involved. Houses are complex things, and tracking down the cause and nature of damage can be even more complex.

With the emergency budget just around the corner, fears are growing in the insurance sector that the government could be about to increase significantly the amount of tax on standard insurance premiums.

At the moment, tax on insurance premiums stands at 5% for standard policies such as car insurance, home insurance and pet insurance. But there is now speculation that the government could at the least double this rate on June 22 when the budget is announced.

Travel insurance is slightly different because it already carries a 17.5% tax rate. There are now fears that other insurance policies will see this level introduced. Premiums are expected to go up even without the extra tax imposed, meaning that the overall prices could rise significantly.

At present the Treasury earns about £2.3 billion a year from insurance tax revenue. If the rates were to rise to 17.5% the Treasury would gain billions of pounds in tax revenues.

But experts say that the higher premiums could stop people buying policies in order to save money in these cash-strapped times. Higher rates will put more pressure on both households and businesses, and this could see people cutting back on vital home and car insurance and playing the odds.

This can lead to huge financial problems if something goes wrong. The ABI (Association of British Insurers) and BIBA (British Insurance Brokers Association) have both said that they will do what they can to persuade the Treasury not to increase the tax rates before the emergency budget is announced.

With many types of insurance, including holiday homes cover, there is typically a period of 14 days during which you can cancel the policy if you change your mind.

This so called “cooling off period” was introduced by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) – which is the body that regulates the insurance industry in the UK.

It protects people who may have been pressurised into buying insurance products that they really didn’t want or those that may have made an error in terms of the policy they’ve selected.

These days, although pressure selling is hopefully less common, it is perfectly possible to still use this cooling off period to consider your deal and to reassure yourself that it is the most suitable insurance for you.

Here at Schofields we recognise that, while cancellation is not an issue for most purchases of our holiday home insurance, there may be times when our customers wish to cancel their insurance with us.

That may be for any one of a number of reasons – the owner selling their holiday home or a new purchase falling through at the last minute.

Here are your rights if you wish to cancel your policy;

Within the cooling off period

If you change your mind within the 14-day cooling off period, you can expect to receive a full refund from us.

You may find that not all insurance companies offer this no-quibble arrangement and some may charge an administration fee for their cancellation service.  Up to £50 to cover admin expenses in setting a policy up are not uncommon.

Cancelling later on

If you decide that you want to cancel after the 14-day period, all you have to do is inform us in writing of your decision – specifying the day you wish your cover to stop.

We will then calculate the premium refund due for the period of cover that you have had and will refund you the balance due.

The longer that you have held your policy, the less of the premium you could expect to receive back. You may wish to note that we retain a minimum premium amount of £105. These terms are outlined in our policy wordings.

Obviously, if you have made a claim on your insurance, then while you are still perfectly free to cancel your cover, no refund would be payable by us.

Cancelling overseas insurance

Any cancellation terms should be clarified when buying foreign property insurance – get the policy translated into English if necessary. Cancelling French insurance is notoriously difficult and some Spanish insurers require two months cancellation notice.

This begs the question; if the insurer makes it difficult to cancel a policy, how willing will they be to pay claims?

At Schofields we value our customers and believe in our products. Even so, we are committed to helping you efficiently and effectively cancel your holiday home policy within the 14-day cooling off period or later, if you need to.

U.S. terrorism insurance purchase rates continued to climb in 2009 as companies of all sizes and across all industries continued to buy terrorism coverage, according to a report by global broker Marsh.

Of the firms surveyed by Marsh, 61% purchased property terrorism insurance in 2009, an increase from 57 % in 2008 and representing a steady climb from 27 % in 2003, according to the report, Terrorism Risk Insurance 2010.

However, the report found that median premium rates declined from $37 per million of total insured value (TIV) in 2008 to $25 per million in 2009. Not surprisingly, capacity in the standalone terrorism insurance market, which has served as an important alternative or supplement to coverage made available through the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA), has grown considerably in recent years, to a theoretical maximum of $3.76 billion, according to Marsh. Primary purchasers in 2009 included hospitality companies, large real estate firms, and financial institutions.

The report indicates several differences by industry, region, and company
size:

•    Utility, real estate, health care, transportation, financial institutions, and media companies purchased property terrorism insurance at the highest rates of the 15 industry segments reviewed, with take-up rates in each sector exceeding 70 %.
•    Construction, hospitality, utility, and real estate companies experienced the highest median premium rates, exceeding $50 per million of TIV.
•    Take-up rates rose most significantly in the Northeast, increased slightly in the South and the West, and remained flat in the Midwest.
•    As a percentage of total property premiums, financial institutions (24%) and transportation companies (17%) paid the largest share; hospitality firms saw the greatest decrease in this area (from 13% to 4%).
•    Smaller companies (with TIV below $100 million) spent 22% of total property premiums on terrorism coverage in 2009. By contrast, relative spending was significantly lower for companies between $100 million and $500 million in TIV (5%), $500 million to $1 billion (7%), and $1 billion or more (11%).

“Terrorism risk remains a critical concern for global companies,” said Ben Tucker, SVP in Marsh’s Property Practice and a lead author of the report. “Recent attempted attacks in New York’s Times Square and on a Detroit-bound flight on Christmas day 2009 remind companies of the importance of securing adequate financial protection against the possible catastrophic impact of terrorist events.”