Waldo Fire Victims Bullied By Insurance Companies

Homeowners affected by the Waldo Canyon Fire feel like they are being bullied by their insurance companies.

Over 100 affected residents were present at a meeting Saturday and there are heated arguments and emotional outburst. A lot stood up for their families and spoke their minds about mistreatment of their fire insurance settlement claims.

The fire victims say they feel abused, neglected and bullied by their insurance companies.

"I've been intimidated, I've been harassed, I’ve been ignored and in the meantime I just want my home back to the pre-loss condition that my policy states I should have,” said Mountain Shadows homeowner Judy Brinkman. “I’m not asking for anything, I don’t want any money from the insurance companies that I am not owed.”

The meeting addresses damage settlements, repairs, property replacement and customer service issues.

Families and homeowners were very emotional as they talked about health issues, improper damage evaluations, and unresponsive adjusters. Many said they are not being properly paid for their losses.

“Everyday you wipe off the dust, you wipe off the suit and ashes. And it got so hot inside the house, that our windows are separated from the house itself” said Peregrine Homeowner Julie Pruitt.

“They've like we don't have to cover that, or the other comment is always, prove that is from the fire. We're just in circular arguments, frustration, anger, resentment, there's just now where to go. You just feel like such a victim,” said Brinkman.

The main issues brought up were : suit, ash and smoke damage, exterior house damage, insurance companies failure to investigate properly, non-responsive insurance adjusters, no time extensions, family health issues caused by the fire, damage not evaluated properly, under insured, suffering from additional costs, not being paid for their losses. Many asked for DORA to investigate their insurance companies, and how they are handling their claims.

“I’m a Vietnam veteran, I went over to Vietnam to protect the people of the United States, and I did my duty. That’s why DORA has to do their duty, and state representatives have to do their duty,” said Mountain Shadows homeowner Ron Haberkorn.

Families who just want to move on after the Waldo Canyon Fire, say the insurance woes are taking a huge emotional toll.

"People just need to be made whole and let people move on, but it's hard to move on when you don't have closure on getting things fixed, and having to struggle through that every day,” said Pruitt.

The newly formed Catastrophic Insurance Complaints in Colorado (CICIC) Association held the meeting at the Colorado Springs Together Facility.

Residents had the chance to offer their issues in order to form some solutions in front of the Colorado Division of Insurance (DORA) as well as local and state leaders and legislators.

If you need help with your Waldo insurance issues, contact CICIC at 719-660-8158.

source kktv

Wedding Insurance

Wedding is expensive and difficult to prepare it takes time, money and sacrifice to set up a wedding to your liking. To make sure it is not ruined by a natural or man-made unfortunate event, it's advisable to have the event insured.

A wedding insurance policy covers cancellation or rescheduling of a marriage due to natural calamities like floods, earthquakes and cyclones, or fire and burglary. It also covers damage to the wedding venue or house of the policyholder due to any such mishap. There are separate covers in the policy and you can opt for the one you want.

You could extend the coverage to include the death of the bride, groom or certain relatives, or an injury to them that may result in their being hospitalised, in case it happens within 10 days prior to the wedding. There's also a public liability cover, which insures any injury to guests due to an accident at the venue. You could also take a cover for jewellery, wedding clothes and cash kept in a safe at home or the venue.

A wedding insurance policy does not cover cancellation of nuptials due to a dispute between the marriage parties, or the bride and groom. Some companies do not extend a cover if the bride or groom is unable to reach the venue due to civil unrest.

Reliance Life Insurance appoints Anup Rau as new CEO

The Board of Directors of Reliance Life Insurance Company (RLIC), a part of Reliance CapitalBSE 3.18 % Limited, today announced the appointment of Mr Anup Rau as the new CEO of the company, subject to IRDA approval.

Rau succeeds Malay Ghosh, President and Executive Director, Reliance Life Insurance.

"Mr Malay Ghosh has played a pivotal role in building the company in challenging times. He also played a key role in forging our relationship with Nippon Life Insurance, the largest private life insurer in Japan, as a strategic partner in the company. He will continue to guide the company as a member on the Board," said Sam Ghosh, CEO, Reliance Capital.

"I am happy to announce the appointment of Anup Rau as the new CEO of Reliance Life Insurance with immediate effect. Rau has extensive experience in the Indian Life Insurance industry and we look to strengthen our leadership position in the life insurance business with him at the helm", added Ghosh. Rau will also be on the Board of Reliance Life Insurance.

Anup Rau, aged 39 years, joins Reliance Life Insurance from HDFC Life Insurance and brings with him over 17 years of industry experience. As the Head of Sales and Distribution in HDFC Life he was responsible for managing Sales Commercials, Distribution Operations and Sales Support.

20 states now have approval to run insurance exchanges

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the latest states to earn conditional approval to operate state-based health insurance exchanges, they are: Arkansas, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Vermont, and Utah.

The grand total of states ready to operate their own exchanges are now 20. The other states already granted approval are Washington, D.C., Colorado, Connecticut, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington.

“States across the country are working to implement the healthcare law and build a marketplace that works for their residents,” says HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “In 10 months, consumers in all 50 states will have access to a new marketplace where they will be able to easily purchase affordable, high-quality health insurance plans, and today’s guidance will provide the information states need to guide their continued work.”

Another 24 states—Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming—have declined to operate their own exchanges, defaulting to a federal exchange instead, according to data collected by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

The six remaining states—Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, North Carolina, and West Virginia—are still in the planning stages for their exchanges, according to Kaiser. They have until February 15 to apply for State Partnership Exchange Approval, HHS says.

Consumers will be able to access the exchanges, mandated by the Affordable Care Act, beginning in 2014. The program will allow the public to buy insurance from qualified health plans directly through these marketplaces and may be eligible for tax credits to help pay for their health insurance.

Happy New Year 2013

May the coming year be filled with peace, happiness and good health,
With lots of luck and loads of wealth,
Wishing you and your family a very happy new year!

Merry Christmas

I hope that your Christmas would be
fun and may the essence of
Christmas remains always with you.

Merry Christmas!!

New insurance rules could cost women drivers £300 a year

Women drivers could face a 40 per cent rise in their car insurance premiums in the EU.

New EU rules which raise women's car insurance costs have been slammed as "gender equality for gender equality's sake".

London MEP (Member of the European Parliament) Marina Yannakoudakis said: "Only in the EU could penalising both women and men be seen as a kind of fairness."

Ms Yannakoudakis, Tory spokesman in the European Parliament on women's rights, hit out on the day that new "gender-neutral" pricing rules came into force.

The rules follow a European Court verdict on sex discrimination and affect areas where different standards apply to the sexes - notably car insurance and pension ages.

Applying equality rules means that men are likely to get lower pension annuities, while women will pay more for car insurance where traditionally they are considered safer drivers and therefore pay lower premiums than men.

Ms Yannakoudakis said women drivers could face a 40 per cent rise in their car insurance premiums, with female drivers under 30 set to be hit hardest. Male pensioners could be left up to $10,000 worse off in retirement.

She said: "This ruling is gender equality for gender equality's sake.

"It flies in the face both of common sense and the overwhelming evidence that women drivers represent a lower risk to insurers.

"Women drivers who have not already changed their policies should shop around to ensure that they get the best deal."

It was in March last year that European Court of Justice judges in Luxembourg rewrote the rule book for insurance companies by banning risk assessment based on gender.

Using differences between men and women as a risk factor in setting premiums for car and medical insurance and pension schemes breaches EU rules on equality, declared the judges.

The verdict forced changes in the current standard practice across Europe of basing insurance rates on statistics about differing life expectancies or road accident records of the sexes.

The Association of British Insurers estimated that the decision will actually reinforce price discrimination, with women drivers under 26 in the UK facing at least a 26 per cent rise in car insurance rates, with a 10 per cent drop in rates for men.

Up until now, discrimination in setting insurance rates was explicitly permitted under EU equal treatment rules, which stated that discrimination was permissible "if sex is a determining risk factor ... substantiated by relevant and accurate actuarial and statistical data".

But the judges decreed that equality provisions set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Lisbon Treaty took precedence.