Insurance commissioner Nonnie Burns does a great job insulting our intelligence in today’s Globe.
The story, concerning the elimination of the Division of Insurance Board of Appeal, cites the fact that the Board reverses one-half of the 50,000 appeals it hears a year from consumers contesting unfair surcharges levied against them by their auto insurer.
But now that we have “competition” among auto insurers Nonnie says there is no need to worry.
Nonnie’s plan is to let the insurance companies hear the appeal. How can that be unfriendly to consumers?
Don’t forget, any Nonnie Plan is also a Deval Plan. Time for change alright. Together Nonnie and Deval can screw the consumers
Here are some quotes from the story and from Nonnie
Burnes said the state’s move to “managed competition,” in which insurers have greater flexibility to design products and set rates, makes the board unnecessary.
“Our foremost priority is consumers, and ensuring they experience every benefit our competitive market has to offer in terms of price, choice, and service,” said Burnes in a statement.
She has touted “accident forgiveness,” in which an insurance company chooses not to charge a higher premium after a motorist is found at-fault for a collision. But some companies don’t do that. Also, it assumes that even if forgiven, a driver assessed a surcharge was properly found to be at fault initially.
Nonnie and Deval made a mistake. They should have send out stupid pills to every auto insurance customer before announcing this exceedingly anti-consumer policy and propaganda.
On Jordan Levy’s (Worcester) talk show, he had an insurance agency owner as a guest who pointed out that the Insurance Hearings Board was actually a profit center, making more in hearing fees than its total expenses.
<
p>You can’t blame the policy as a cost cutting measure!
when a person appeals, there are two possibilities:
<
p>1. The person wins outright. Then, the insurance company both has to do the right thing and pay triple the cost of the hearing. This will help the insurance company not be overzealous.
<
p>2. The person doesn’t win outright. Then, status quo prevails.
<
p>EBIII, based solely on what you’ve written, I’m with you on this one. A rarity indeed.
Where’s this post?
<
p>I think you forgot to press a key or something.
never mind this post the You tube clip on the BMG Home page is great best I have seen yet. I never would have guessed you were so talented you really should lay off the blogging you look like you can make a fortune as a performer.
<
p>By the way I agree I think Nonnie Burns is wrong I think the evidence is clear in this economic crisis we are in that insurance companies are only interested in Profits with out regard for the role they play as part of a society. Taking Regs off of them at this time would be a major mistake. Maybe we need to get Nonnie on BMG to read some of the posts about the bad behavior of AIG and have her show some evidence that can convince us that Auto insurers are not the same animal.
<
p>As Usual justmy Opinion
Maybe I missed this in the media: How many appeals were heard by this board last year and how much money in premiums was at stake?
On NPR last week they interview said 50,000 on average per year and the reverse about 50% so 25,000 accidents say 3 points on the old system times 4 years to work them off at about 120.00 per year in lost rebates or increase premiums so 480.00 (approx) x 25,000 (approx) looks like about 12 million give or take a million depending on the driver and level of accident. I have not seen any hard numbers associated also what was pointed out was there is a 50.00 filing charge for the hearing times 50,000 and that was 2.5 million in fees and I believe I saw the cost of the program was $800,000 I may be wrong on that number since I can not find it so the commonwealth is losing 1.7 million in revenue as a result and the Insurance company stands to make 12 Million.
<
p>Sounds like a great trade off NOT!
<
p>As usual just my opinion
I come from another dimension, a parallel universe of sorts. See my people hold the belief that world de-population is the ultimate goal. Our news analysts and commentators saw through people like Deval and Obama well before they were “elected”. Accepting all things New World Order is liberating cause you get to wake up each day knowing it might be your last. The lives of sheeple concerns me not. All I can go is keep doing what I have done in the past until THEY end it for all of us.
<
p>Must … not … break … Rules of the Road …
<
p>Must … not … argh.
I don’t think that competition will solve this problem, because the decision is openly “shared” across insurers. An insurance company decides if you are at fault for an accident, and once that is hung on your record, with no chance to appeal, you will pay higher premiums (for years) since every company respects their finding without question.
<
p>Seems to me that when a private company has the right to alter your life with a decision that goes beyond your relationship with just that company, there should be a public appeal process.
We will throw a party. Look Ernie was correct sounding the trumpet on this but putting it in the frame work that this is a great social shift by one or two elected officials is just crazy. Governor Deval Patrick has picked up the baton to move Massachusetts forward his policies as a result of his challenges I think are to be commended. I certainly would not want to experience this collapse with Mitt in charge why I would have to go out and hire a food tester and someone to walk in front of my car to make sure the bridge was safe to cross that would be a real financial hardship. Let us not suggest Bambi Healy could find her way Out of this Man that’s funnier then seeing Ernie on that video Bob posted.
<
p>Her solution would be something like this;
<
p>Governor’s Aide; “the peasants are starving there is no bread”
<
p>Governor: “Let them eat Cake then”
<
p>Wow there is a hope and a dream for you and a Nightmare for the majority of us.
<
p>As Usual just my opinion
Absolutely, I agree that I would rather have Deval Patrick at the helm than Mitt Romney or any other Republican. However, I think in this instance, Deval Patrick and Nonnie Burns are wrong, and they should realize that a board of appeals for something like determining that a driver is at-fault in an accident is an important part of the process.
It is OK to be wrong on an issue lets see what Deval and Nonnie do about, I certainly have more faith in them coming to a reasonable solution.
<
p>As Usual just my Opinion