Money and Morals: Ethical Underwriting and Insurance Claims Practices
This blog follows insurance coverage issues from time to time because insurance reimburses us for losses; litigation presumes loss; and, the negotiated resolution of litigation requires the parties to understand the benefits and limitations of everyone's insurance policies.
We also talk a lot about ethics here because people and businesses embroiled in litigation are -- contrary to popular belief -- seeking a just or equitable or fair or ethical resolution.
I cannot say this enough -- IT IS NEVER ONLY ABOUT MONEY.
Nevertheless, I was surprised this morning to see the National Underwriter Blog ask and attempt to answer the following question: Is the Concurrent Causation Clause Ethical?
I also have to tell you that I never once, not on a single occasion, in 25 years of legal practice, a decade of which was spent concentrating on insurance coverage issues, did I ever hear anyone ask whether any underwriting or claims practice was ethical!
Before weighing in, I'm going to just let this question percolate in my consciousness for awhile. If you go to the linked article, you'll see some thoughtful answers. Aside from a little predictable judge-bashing, the readers who paused to answer this question -- both from an underwriting and a claims perspective -- did so with a depth of understanding of the issues involved and the history of the clause at issue -- the one that is at the heart of the hurricane damage claims.
If you're reading this from the land of hurricanes, you might want to check out this resource that was serendipitously emailed to me this morning: 25 Tips to Secure Your Home During Hurricane Season.
Fellow Southern Californians can also find tips to protect your house against wildfires there.
If we want to start eliminating difficult to understand concepts and terminology, let's go after Actual Cash Value! Some might say that it is replacement cost minus depreciation. How simplistic!