The Ten Worst Insurance Companies in America
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
2020 Allstate Sustainability Re
Allstate sustainability report PURPOSE our shared purpose As the Good Hands… We empower customers with protection to help them achieve their hopes and dreams. We provide affordable, simple and connected protection solutions. We create opportunity for our team, economic value for our shareholders and improve communities. Overview Our Values • Integrity is non-negotiable. • Inclusive Diversity & Equity values and leverages unique identities with equitable opportunity and rewards. • Collective Success is achieved through empathy and prioritizing enterprise outcomes ahead of individuals. Our Operating Standards • Focus on Customers by anticipating and exceeding service expectations at low costs. • Be the Best at protecting customers, developing talent and running our businesses. • Be Bold with original ideas using speed and conviction to beat the competition. • Earn Attractive Returns by providing customer value, proactively accepting risk and using analytics. Our Behaviors • Collaborate early and often to develop and implement comprehensive solutions and share learnings. • Challenge Ideas to leverage collective expertise, evaluate multiple alternatives and create the best path forward. • Provide Clarity for expected outcomes, decision authority and accountability. • Provide Feedback that is candid, actionable, independent of hierarchy and safe. Allstate 2020 Sustainability Report 1 The story of Our Shared Purpose The story of Our Shared Purpose began years ago, when Tom Wilson became CEO with the goal of making Allstate more customer focused and faster moving. A dozen senior leaders of the corporation went through what became the Energy for Life program to articulate their personal purpose and build plans to achieve it. In , Allstate created a similar plan, and Our Shared Vision became the company’s new story. -
UNUM Multistate Examination Settlement Agreement
Report of theTargeted Multistate Market Conduct Examination As of December 31, 2002 (“Initial Review”) and February 29, 2004 (“FollowUp Review”) For Maine Bureau of Insurance Massachusetts Division of Insurance Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance And FortyNine Participating Jurisdictions: Alabama, Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming Of Unum Life Insurance Company of America NAIC Company #62235 Portland, Maine The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company NAIC Company #67598 Worcester, Massachusetts Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company NAIC Company #68195 Chattanooga, Tennessee NAIC Group # 0565 November 18, 2004 Contents Topic Page Salutation 1 Foreword 2 Background and Scope of Examination 2 Profile of the Companies 4 Claim Selection Methodology 5 Areas of Concern 6 Plan of Corrective Action 10 Report Submission 14 Exhibit A 15 Exhibit B 17 Exhibit C 18 Exhibit D 19 RACKEMANN, SAWYER & BREWSTER PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION COUNSELORS AT LAW ESTABLISHED 1886 ONE FINANCIAL CENTER BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 021112659 TELEPHONE 6175422300 FACSIMILE 6175427437 -
2002 Chairman's Letter
Note: The following table appears in the printed Annual Report on the facing page of the Chairman's Letter and is referred to in that letter. Berkshire’s Corporate Performance vs. the S&P 500 Annual Percentage Change in Per-Share in S&P 500 Book Value of with Dividends Relative Berkshire Included Results Year (1) (2) (1)-(2) 1965 .................................................. 23.8 10.0 13.8 1966 .................................................. 20.3 (11.7) 32.0 1967 .................................................. 11.0 30.9 (19.9) 1968 .................................................. 19.0 11.0 8.0 1969 .................................................. 16.2 (8.4) 24.6 1970 .................................................. 12.0 3.9 8.1 1971 .................................................. 16.4 14.6 1.8 1972 .................................................. 21.7 18.9 2.8 1973 .................................................. 4.7 (14.8) 19.5 1974 .................................................. 5.5 (26.4) 31.9 1975 .................................................. 21.9 37.2 (15.3) 1976 .................................................. 59.3 23.6 35.7 1977 .................................................. 31.9 (7.4) 39.3 1978 .................................................. 24.0 6.4 17.6 1979 .................................................. 35.7 18.2 17.5 1980 .................................................. 19.3 32.3 (13.0) 1981 .................................................. 31.4 (5.0) 36.4 1982 ................................................. -
In the Court of Appeals of the State of Mississippi No. 2017
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2017-CA-01380-COA ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY APPELLANT/ CROSS-APPELLEE v. GLORIA MILLSAPS, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN APPELLEES/ HER CAPACITY AS THE ADMINISTRATOR CROSS-APPELLANTS OF THE ESTATE OF WILLIE MILLSAPS, DECEASED DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/11/2017 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. EDDIE H. BOWEN COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: JASPER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: J. COLLINS WOHNER JR. DAVID GARNER MICHAEL B. WALLACE ROBERT R. STEPHENSON JR. ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES: SAMUEL STEVEN McHARD PAUL MANION ANDERSON NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - CONTRACT DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED - 05/12/2020 MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED: MANDATE ISSUED: EN BANC. McDONALD, J., FOR THE COURT: ¶1. Willie and Gloria Millsaps’s home, located in Jones County, Mississippi, burned on September 3, 2015. After investigating the fire, their insurer, “Allstate”1 denied the claim. 1 In this case there are two “Allstate” entities: Allstate Insurance Company and Allstate Vehicle and Property Insurance Company. Unless otherwise indicated, we use the term “Allstate” to reference Allstate Insurance Company. The Millsapses sued Allstate for breach of contract and other contract-related claims in the Circuit Court of Jasper County, Mississippi. A jury found in favor of the Millsapses against Allstate Insurance Company on the Breach of Contract claim and awarded them a total of $970,000 in damages. After reconvening and hearing testimony on punitive damages, the jury awarded the Millsapses an additional $230,000 in emotional damages ($115,000 for each), and $100,000 in punitive damages. The two verdicts totaled $1,300,000. -
Jim Stanton Leon Feazell Charles Bolcom
Jim Stanton Leon Feazell Charles Bolcom www.cooperscully.com © 2017 This paper and/or presentation provides information on general legal issues. It is not intended to provide advice on any specific legal matter or factual situation, and should not be construed as defining Cooper and Scully, P.C.'s position in a particular situation. Each case must be evaluated on its own facts. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act on this information without receiving professional legal counsel. Terminology MCS - 90: “Endorsement For Motor Carrier Policies of Insurance For Public Liability Under Sections 29 and 30 of the Motor Carrier Act of 1980“ 49 C.F.R. §§ 387.7, 387.15 Statute and Regulations do not specifically reference “MCS - 90" Form created by the regulatory agency Formerly - ICC Abolished 1996 Now – FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration) Part of D.O.T Terminology MCA - The Statute: Federal Motor Carrier Act of 1980 49 U.S.C. § 10101 et seq. FMCSR - The Regulations: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 49 C.F.R. Parts 300-399 Online: www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations Under Authority Secretary of Transportation, to provide requirements for operations and equipment of motor vehicles 49 U.S.C. § 14102 (a)(4) Purposes of MCS-90 Reasons MCA Enacted: Deregulate trucking industry Address abuses regarding public safety MCS - 90 Purpose: Assure vehicles, including leased, covered by authorized carrier’s insurance Mandate that carriers assume responsibility for vehicles, including leased. 49 C.F.R. §387.1 Mandate that insurance applies to vehicles, including leased, not on the policy. -
2013 in Review
2013 in review INSURANCE INSTITUTE FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY HIGHWAY LOSS DATA INSTITUTE The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is an independent, nonprofit scientific and educational organization dedicated to reducing the losses — deaths, injuries and property damage — from crashes on the nation’s roads. The Highway Loss Data Institute shares and supports this mission through scientific studies of insurance data representing the human and economic losses resulting from the ownership and operation of different types of vehi- cles and by publishing insurance loss results by vehicle make and model. Both organizations are wholly supported by the following auto insurers and funding associations: MEMBER GROUPS Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Acceptance Insurance Louisiana Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company ACE Private Risk Services Maryland Automobile Insurance Fund Affirmative Insurance Mercury Insurance Group Alfa Alliance Insurance Corporation MetLife Auto & Home Alfa Insurance Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance Company Allstate Insurance Group MiddleOak American Family Mutual Insurance Mississippi Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company American National Family of Companies MMG Insurance Ameriprise Auto & Home Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance Company Amica Mutual Insurance Company Nationwide Auto Club Enterprises New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Group Auto Club Group Nodak Mutual Insurance Company Auto-Owners Insurance Norfolk & Dedham Group Aviva Insurance North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Bankers Insurance Group Northern -
2021 US Auto Insurance Study
Auto Insurance Customer Satisfaction Stalls Despite $18 Billion in Premium Relief, J.D. Power Finds Weaknesses in Self-Service Communications Channels Overshadow Pandemic-Driven Refunds TROY, Mich.: 15 June 2021 — The auto insurance industry voluntarily returned more than $18 billion in auto insurance premiums to customers in 2020 to address the sharp decline in miles driven during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the magnitude of this historic relief effort, the J.D. Power 2021 U.S. Auto Insurance Study,SM released today, finds that overall customer satisfaction with auto insurers is flat, following four consecutive years of improvement. “What we’re seeing in this year’s study is a case of insurers delivering with their actions but missing the mark on effective communication to their customers,” said Robert Lajdziak, senior consultant for insurance intelligence at J.D. Power. “The refunds provided to customers during the pandemic were significant, representing nearly 7% of total industry premiums, but only half of customers were even aware of them. Worse, when customers needed to communicate with their insurers, either via phone, website or chat, many came away feeling less satisfied with the result than in the past.” Following are some of the key findings of the 2021 study: • Overall satisfaction stagnates: Overall customer satisfaction with auto insurance providers is 835 (on a 1,000-point scale) this year, unchanged from a year ago. This is the first time since 2017 that auto insurance customer satisfaction has not improved year over year. • Insurers miss the mark in communication: While price is the lowest-scoring factor in the study, it has seen the greatest improvement year over year. -
Insurance Report
Collision Auto / Collision Moto Comp Auto / Comp Moto Highway Loss Data Institute Theft — Auto /Moto combined Insurance Report Noncrash fire losses PD — Auto PD, BI, Med Pay — Moto BI — Auto Prepared by HLDI for NHTSA Med Pay — Auto 2016–18 Passenger Cars, Pickups, SUVs, and Vans PIP — Auto only December 2018 This Highway Loss Data Institute reportNon-crash presents re comprehensive — Auto only noncrash fire losses for passenger vehicles produced in model years 2016–18. Noncrash fire losses represent fire damage to a vehicle not caused by a collision or vandalism. Results in this report are based on more than 39 million insured vehicle years and more than 5,500 claims. Special — Auto /Moto Specs 2018 Board of Directors Chair Mike Petrarca, Amica Mutual Insurance Company Vice Chair Anthony E. Ptasznik, Auto Club Group Prior Chair Harry Todd Pearce, GEICO Corporation Justin B. Cruz, American Family Insurance David Cummings, USAA Michael D. Doerfler, Progressive Insurance Josh Grunin, The Hartford John Hardiman, New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Group Robert Harrington, Erie Insurance Group Thomas Karol, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies Andy Lau, Kemper Corporation Dawn Lee, PEMCO Mutual Insurance Company Richard Lonardo, MetLife Auto and Home Justin Milam, American National Hamid Mirza, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Thomas G. Myers, Plymouth Rock Assurance James Nutting, Farmers Insurance Group of Companies Robert C. Passmore, Property Casualty Insurers Association of America Thomas O. Rau, Nationwide Insurance Bill Reddington, Kentucky Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Michael Stienstra, CHUBB Laurette Stiles, State Farm Insurance Companies James Whittle, American Insurance Association Geoff Williams, Allstate Insurance Group Andrew Woods, The Travelers Companies John Xu, CSAA Insurance Group David L. -
Kastning V. State Farm – Minnesota Court of Appeals
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A12-0584 Bruce Kastning, et al., Appellants, vs. State Farm Insurance Companies, Respondent. Filed September 24, 2012 Affirmed Hooten, Judge Hon. Douglas L. Richards Faribault County District Court File No. 22-CV-11-182 Jason D. Pederson, Fuller, Wallner, Cayko & Pederson, Ltd., Bemidji, Minnesota (for appellants) Gregory E. Kuderer, Fairmont, Minnesota; and Kay N. Hunt, Lommen Abdo Cole King Stageberg PA, Minneapolis, Minnesota (for respondent) Considered and decided by Worke, Presiding Judge; Hooten, Judge; and Collins, Judge.* S Y L L A B U S An uninsured farm tractor is not a “motor vehicle” for purposes of the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 65B.41-.71 (2010), because a farm tractor is neither subject to registration under chapter 168 of the Minnesota Statutes nor designed “for use primarily upon public roads, highways or streets.” Neither is an * Retired judge of the district court, serving as judge of the Minnesota Court of Appeals by appointment pursuant to Minn. Const. art. VI, § 10. uninsured farm tractor a “motor vehicle” under the uninsured motorist coverage of an insurance policy that defines “motor vehicle,” in part, as subject to registration under chapter 168 of the Minnesota Statutes and “designed for use on public highways.” O P I N I O N HOOTEN, Judge Appellants challenge the district court’s summary-judgment dismissal of their claim for uninsured motorist coverage under a policy issued by respondent, arguing that the farm tractor with which they collided was an uninsured “motor vehicle” within the meaning of their policy and, alternatively, that they are entitled to coverage under the reasonable-expectations doctrine. -
Liberty Mutual Insurance Europe SE - Licensing Capabilities
Liberty Mutual Insurance Europe SE - Licensing capabilities Country Insurance Reinsurance Argentina Not licensed LMIE is an admitted reinsurer in Argentina The most important current limits to be respected are noted below. ▪ From 1 July 2017 insurers may place 50% of annual ceded premiums with admitted reinsurers (the former limit was 10%), with further increases to 60% from 1 July 2018 and 75% from 1 July 2019. ▪ Insurers can place facultatively the entirety of any individual risk of USD 35mn or more (formerly only the excess above USD 50mn) with admitted reinsurers, as they can all catastrophe contracts with the same minimum sum insured. ▪ Insurers which accept up to 10% of their direct premiums as reinsurance must place their retrocessions with local reinsurers. ▪ The SSN will investigate any retention per risk in excess of 15% and per accumulation of risks in excess of 25% of local reinsurers' capital. ▪ Local reinsurers may transfer a maximum of 75% (formerly 40%) of their annual premiums to intra-group companies based overseas. While no minimum retention of premiums is established by law for local insurers or reinsurers, the SSN has made it clear on various occasions to individual players that it will not allow 100% fronting, since this would be to act as an intermediary rather than a risk carrier. In practice it is understood retentions made on some risks may be of 1% or even less. Retentions for insurers are covered in Article 32 of both Law No 20.091 and the RGAA, which states that the SSN will review any retention in excess of 15% of capital and free reserves, or 40% of the surplus in the Statement of Cover for Commitments Due and Settled Claims Payable which companies must submit quarterly to the SSN. -
Unum Group (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter)
Table of Contents UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) [X] Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 [ ] Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 For the transition period from to Commission file number 1-11294 Unum Group (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 62-1598430 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 1 FOUNTAIN SQUARE CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE 37402 (Address of principal executive offices) 423.294.1011 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Name of each exchange on which registered Common stock, $0.10 par value New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes [X] No [ ] Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes [ ] No [X] Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. -
2019 SEC Form 10-K (PDF File)
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K ☑ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 OR ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission file number 001-14905 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. (Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 47-0813844 State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization Identification No.) 3555 Farnam Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68131 (Address of principal executive office) (Zip Code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (402) 346-1400 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading Symbols Name of each exchange on which registered Class A Common Stock BRK.A New York Stock Exchange Class B Common Stock BRK.B New York Stock Exchange 0.750% Senior Notes due 2023 BRK23 New York Stock Exchange 1.125% Senior Notes due 2027 BRK27 New York Stock Exchange 1.625% Senior Notes due 2035 BRK35 New York Stock Exchange 0.500% Senior Notes due 2020 BRK20 New York Stock Exchange 1.300% Senior Notes due 2024 BRK24 New York Stock Exchange 2.150% Senior Notes due 2028 BRK28 New York Stock Exchange 0.250% Senior Notes due 2021 BRK21 New York Stock Exchange 0.625% Senior Notes due 2023 BRK23A New York Stock Exchange 2.375% Senior Notes due 2039 BRK39 New York Stock Exchange 2.625% Senior Notes due 2059 BRK59 New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: NONE Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.