tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-82019453773005533662024-03-05T15:24:34.784-08:00Insurancejazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.comBlogger153125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-67956161978367542862014-01-18T12:24:00.000-08:002014-01-18T12:24:04.644-08:00HelloWe have some of the best on the planet. Wouldn't you agree? We'd appreciate your vote!jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-58812582296736138122014-01-02T13:03:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:25:43.611-08:00Extended Dwelling Coverage on a Homeowner<div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKwdcO0Nk_xx2G93phScz4QAl_mvCj0FeYvCzwKgXEJ7_HxFA_vZ1yDh3AyZPDAZFdcZkPW8FWzx7sP9wtsl8MTvc1GwaEpaUQQAYbl7EdLam2cRPAXWre4t-ucRctoRZ9ITHqo7dosak/s1600/MP900442644%5B1%5D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" closure_lm_736709="null" gua="true" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKwdcO0Nk_xx2G93phScz4QAl_mvCj0FeYvCzwKgXEJ7_HxFA_vZ1yDh3AyZPDAZFdcZkPW8FWzx7sP9wtsl8MTvc1GwaEpaUQQAYbl7EdLam2cRPAXWre4t-ucRctoRZ9ITHqo7dosak/s320/MP900442644%5B1%5D.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';">Many moons ago all insurance companies used to have guaranteed replacement cost endorsement you could put on your homeowner policy. This endorsement would guarantee that the insurance company would rebuild your house exactly as it was prior to the claim even if your limit of insurance on the house was lower than the cost to rebuild. Today many insurance companies limit that endorsement to only homes that are considered high value (homes valued at $500,000 or more). The endorsements also require that the insurance companies send out professional reconstruction appraisers to figure out as best they can what it would cost to rebuild your home.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';">For those homeowner clients who have a house valued at less than $500,000 the endorsement that needs to be added to the homeowner policy is Extended Dwelling Coverage. What this endorsement does is give a percentage of the homeowner limit as extra coverage in case of a total loss on the home. For example, if you have 25% Extended Dwelling Coverage and your house is insured for $200,000 then you would actually have $250,000 if your home suffered a total loss ($200,000 X 1.25 = $250,000).<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><br />We feel this coverage is important for two reasons. One reason is we do not send out professional reconstruction appraisers to every house. Instead, insurance companies use in house software that helps determine reconstruction cost on your house using things like square footage, construction type, location, year built, etc. to come up with a value. These programs are usually very accurate but nothing replaces the accuracy of an in home visit with measuring tape and details of the type of amenities in the house. The Extended Dwelling Coverage endorsement helps make sure that if for some reason the calculations on the house are a little off, there is still enough insurance there to replace the house to its original state.<br /><br />The second reason we encourage this endorsement is for catastrophe situations. Let’s say a tornado wipes out not only your house but two other neighborhoods worth of homes. Every builder and building supplier in town will be in demand. Economics 101 will tell you that if demand goes up and supply is the same, then prices are going to rise. That home that only cost $200,000 to rebuild just got a lot more expensive but if you have the Extended Dwelling Coverage on your homeowner you would be in a much better situation.<br /><br />One thing to note about this endorsement, you can’t use it to underinsure your home. In our example above, you can’t insure the house for only $160,000 and add the 25% Extended Dwelling Coverage (which would put your total insurance at $200,000). That is not the intent of the coverage. The insure companies will use their software to figure out a good estimate of the cost to rebuild your house and you would have to have it insured for that amount in order to add the coverage.</span><o:p></o:p></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-26447574393475578382013-11-21T10:29:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:25:43.623-08:00Rental Car Coverage <br /><div><div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;">The Holiday Season brings on a lot of travel. People are either taking advantage of time off to go on vacation or they are traveling to see loved ones in other areas of the country. Either way they often rent a vehicle during the Holiday Season so we thought it would be a good idea to post our thoughts on whether to buy or not buy rental car insurance. </div><div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlVWstq-dOdnfwKeqAmc_AORunUhALgdzoKMwSntXbuOwLOd4ekzyZ6QEiNNRK14eNgXSeB_rQ9GKdgTVSgNzzEBZvfzRkQT5GUDYVgbdVPqzaEa0QI1aR32SZQ4Wp_jPA2aeb6RC-TQY/s1600/Pic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlVWstq-dOdnfwKeqAmc_AORunUhALgdzoKMwSntXbuOwLOd4ekzyZ6QEiNNRK14eNgXSeB_rQ9GKdgTVSgNzzEBZvfzRkQT5GUDYVgbdVPqzaEa0QI1aR32SZQ4Wp_jPA2aeb6RC-TQY/s320/Pic.jpg" width="213" /></a>The first question we get from customers asking about rental cars is "does my insurance cover a rental car that I rent?" Our answer is always a "gray" answer because it just depends on the coverage they selected on their personal insurance policy, what state they will be traveling in and what rental car company they are using. Because of this "gray" response we always recommend at least take out Collision Damage Waiver from rental car companies. Here are four reasons why this is always a safe option:</div><div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;">1. <u> Chance of claims is higher when traveling</u>: In our opinion the chance of a claim when you are driving around an unfamiliar city are much higher then when you are around your hometown. You are not often sure of where you are going so you may spend more time looking at road signsor GPS devices instead of focusing on other vehicles. </div><div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"> </div><div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;">2.<u> Claims paid out by your own policy can cause your rates to increase</u>: As mentioned in item 1, the chance of a claim is higher when in unfamiliar areas and if you were to have a claim and did not buy the Collision Damage Waiver than the payment of the claim would come from your personal auto policy. This could cause your rates to increase. If, however, you had purchased the Collision Damage Waiver from the rental car company the damages to the rental car would be paid by the rental car company and not your personal auto policy. This would help preserve your claims history.</div><div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;">3. <u> Your auto insurance deductible would apply</u>: If you have a claim and need to go under your own insurance, often your auto policy deductible would apply. If, however you take out the Collision Damage Waiver there would be no deductible.</div><div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"> </div><div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;">4. <u>Dealing with out of state accidents is difficult</u>: If you were to cause an accident while on vacation you would have to work with the rental car company on getting their car fixed by your insurance company (again, assuming you didn't purchase the Collision Damage Waiver). You also run the risk of them automatically charging the damages to your credit card which some rental car contracts let them do. If you did have the Collision Damage Waiver, however, you would just simply turn the car over to the rental car company and they would then deal with all the repairs and not bother you with getting payment for the damages.</div><div style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;">It is because of these four points that in <a href="http://www.feyinsurance.com/" target="_blank">Fey Insurance Service's</a> opinion it is always good to purchase the Collision Damage Waiver from the rental car companies. If anything it gives you peace of mind during your Holiday travels.</div></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-67697816875906117222013-11-07T06:06:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:25:43.632-08:00Named Peril vs. Open Peril Homeowner Policies <br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Many today feel all homeowner policies are the same, that they are a commodity of sorts. In our professional opinion this is not the case. One glaring difference between homeowner policies is whether they are “Named Peril” or “Open Peril” homeowner policies. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjh_V5rqZ4ztzPIi8gccWCaviXfcNCmXBTO4bVV2o-LYMumb2DsOdU5dp9Bfr74_ik3JZw2uVkVRmLE1f_0iUBw8wpNR9DfEGVU0Jybrg9CgywoObLxWWFOhhU7UrYgKyvVA2B5_Brpp4o/s1600/Photo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjh_V5rqZ4ztzPIi8gccWCaviXfcNCmXBTO4bVV2o-LYMumb2DsOdU5dp9Bfr74_ik3JZw2uVkVRmLE1f_0iUBw8wpNR9DfEGVU0Jybrg9CgywoObLxWWFOhhU7UrYgKyvVA2B5_Brpp4o/s320/Photo.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Named Peril insurance policies specifically list the risks they will cover your home for. The policy contract will cover such happenings as wind, lightning, fire, smoke, theft, etc. If something happens to your home that doesn’t fall into the insurance policies definitions of the name peril terms than there is no coverage.</span></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Open Peril insurance policies state that all risks are covered except for a list of exclusions that are outlined in the policy contract. This type of contract gives broader coverage than a Named Peril because the incident that happened to your home or personal contents doesn’t have to fit into a certain definition of coverage. As long as the incident isn’t excluded it is covered.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">A homeowner policy that is using a “Named Peril” contract will always be cheaper than an “Open Peril” contract. It is important to know this so that you don’t fall victim to purchasing solely on price. You may be excited to see a savings from one policy to the next but that savings could be at a much higher cost and exposure to you. Unfortunately you may not know this until you actually have a claim and are staring at a bill that would have been covered under an Open Peril policy but is not covered now under your Named Peril policy. <o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">This is just one example of what may be different between homeowner policies. Other things like deductibles, specialty items coverage, fallen tree coverage, water backing up sewers and drains, and earthquake coverage are a few others to consider.</span>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-68206694126127452252013-10-05T03:50:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:22:23.862-08:00Legal Challenge to ACA Contraceptive Coverage Mandate Could Portend More Complications for Self-Insurance Marketplace<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The United States Supreme Court is now expected to consider Hobby Lobby’s legal challenge to the contraceptive coverage mandate implemented as part of the Affordable Care Act.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The owners of the national retailer claim that the law’s requirement that the company’s group health plan includes coverage for contraceptive services violates their religious beliefs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span><br /><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">This blog remains agnostic with regard to the religious liberty issues, but there are evolving self-insurance angles related to this story that deserve attention.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">We recently reported that federal regulators contend the final contraceptive coverage mandate rules incudes a practical accommodation for most self-insured religious organizations (non-profit entities), but<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>it’s really just a bureaucratic illusion. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The rules allow such organizations a functional exemption from the requirements by transferring all financial and administration responsibilities to their third party administrator (TPA) partners.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">While this firewall approach may have satisfied the Administration’s political considerations, it is so far proving unworkable in the real world as multiple TPAs servicing this market segment report that they cannot perform the required responsibilities, citing specific substantive reasons.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The end result is that these self-insured religious non-profit organizations may simply have to dissolve their self-insured group health plans to the extent that they wish to stick to their religious convictions.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Hobby Lobby case potentially adds a new twist specific to for-profit self-insured companies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In other words, companies that do not have a primary religious mission but whose owners may have strong religious beliefs.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">There are actually about 60 similar cases pending in various federal courts and we expect that some companies are self-insured and others are not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(This blog has not independently verified the funding structure of Hobby Lobby’s group health plans, but it is likely self-insured given the company’s size.)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hobby Lobby is the highest profile case both because of its size and because its position was affirmed by the 10<sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">th</span></sup>Circuit Court of Appeals in June of this year.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">In addition to the central constitutional issue, Court may also need decide whether the ACA is in conflict with the 1993 Religious Freed Restoration Act (RFRA), which says the government “shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion” unless that burden is the least restrictive means to further a compelling government interest.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">A broad ruling by Court declaring the ACA contraceptive coverage mandate provisions unconstitutional outright would take this issue off the table.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An equally broad ruling in the other direction would certainly not be welcome by Hobby Lobby and other similar plaintiffs, but it would at least bring some clarity to their legal obligations.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The more interesting scenario is if the Court charts a middle course in its ruling and determines that the exemption arrangement designed for self-insured religious organization could satisfy the RFRA’s “least restrictive means test” and therefore opens this option up for companies like Hobby Lobby. <o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">In other words, allow these for profit companies to self-certify as exempt organizations for purpose side-stepping compliance with the contraceptive coverage mandate.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">But for self-insured companies it would not be that simple because their TPA partners will be put in the same tenuous position as the current non-profit exempt organizations have already done, which could force these companies into more expensive fully-insured health insurance arrangements or drop coverage altogether. <o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Yes, companies may be able to rely on legally permissible firewalls should the Court rule accordingly, but both their TPAs and sponsored self-insured group health plans may end up getting burned in the process.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Perhaps this may be an unanticipated example of being careful of what you ask for…or on this case, what you pray for.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-33672134615826552312013-10-02T05:28:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:25:43.642-08:00Douglas M. Fey<a href="http://www.feyinsurance.com/" target="_blank">Fey Insurance Services</a> morns the loss of Douglas M Fey who served those in our agency as an owner, brother and uncle. We will greatly miss him and his warm spirit around the office. Below is his obituary.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhX9SeV3ARawyIIVXwCigDt2CFwbJJHzrzI1L6v-RHzvRDDGvpvmasR7sqHp5wrN53cSN0jd0ZNwC-ATKpnKJOlcKWQeD8EysV10sFctZWjuV24XSqJZ1pd5KX43jfQxonk5gGHxkBEz00/s1600/IMG_1372.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhX9SeV3ARawyIIVXwCigDt2CFwbJJHzrzI1L6v-RHzvRDDGvpvmasR7sqHp5wrN53cSN0jd0ZNwC-ATKpnKJOlcKWQeD8EysV10sFctZWjuV24XSqJZ1pd5KX43jfQxonk5gGHxkBEz00/s320/IMG_1372.JPG" width="240" /></a></div>FEY, Douglas Michael age 64, went home to be with the Lord on Friday, September 27, 2013. He was born on December 30, 1948 in Cincinnati, OH, the son of Ralph N. Fey and Ruth Yvonne Curpen "Bonnie" Fey. He attended school in Oxford graduating from Talawanda High School and later attending Miami University in Oxford where he was awarded a Bachelors of Science Degree in Business Administration in 1971. While at Miami he was a member of Beta Theta Pi Fraternity where he served as Chapter Treasurer. Following graduation he entered the U. S. Army serving in the Finance Branch in the United States and for 18 months in South Korea. Upon completion of his military service he returned to Oxford to begin working in the family insurance business with his father, older brother, his sister-in-law and later his nephew. Doug was Vice President of Fey Insurance Services. He loved to fly and held a commercial instructor's rating, and at one time he owned a vintage 1946 Piper Cub which he hangered at his family's farm. In addition, he was at various times a member of the Oxford Presbyterian Church, the Oxford Kiwanis Club, the Oxford Rotary Club and the Oxford Country Club. On October 17, 1993, Doug married his beloved Paulette, and they moved to Lebanon, OH where he lived the rest of his life. Doug and Paulette loved to travel and spend time with their children and grandchildren. He leaves his brother, Thomas Curpen Fey (Cathy) of Oxford, Ohio, Paulette's daughters Amber Mitchell (Jon) of New Carlisle, Ohio, Kim Martin (Zach) of Loveland, Ohio and Laura Hockett of Lebanon, and thirteen grandchildren including Samantha Mitchell, Milo Mitchell, Ulyana Mitchell, Ilia Mitchell, Anastasia Mitchell, Slava Mitchell, Olga Mitchell, China Martin, Nova Martin, Cherokee Martin, Zion Martin, Ivy Hockett, a niece, Elizabeth Fey Mundy (Al) of Cincinnati, Ohio and nephew, Brian Douglas Fey (Kate) of Cincinnati, Ohio and their children. He was preceded in death by his parents. Visitation will be held on Wednesday October 2nd from 10:00-12noon at Oswald-Hoskins Funeral Home with a service immediately following. Interment will take place in Lebanon Cemetery. Arrangements were made by Oswald-Hoskins Funeral Home. Online condolences may be sent to the family by visiting <a href="http://www.hoskinsfh.com/">www.hoskinsfh.com</a>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-8592361557637274642013-08-21T17:28:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:22:23.871-08:00DOL Teams Up With Vermont on the Latest ERISA Preemption Attack<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The practice of individual states enacting laws that arguably infringe on ERISA preemption is not new.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, some states have become increasingly creative in poking and prodding at the limits of this federal law, which has raised obvious concerns among those involved in the self-insurance marketplace.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(See previous blog posts commenting on the Michigan health care claims tax.)<o:p></o:p></span><br /><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">A new twist worth reporting on is the fact that the Department of Labor has apparently decided to take a more hands-on (political) role in shaping the evolving legal landscape, positioning the agency as a powerful accomplice in the effort to make self-insurance a more challenging risk management strategy.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;">This intent was demonstrated last month by the DOL’s decision to file an Amicus brief in the case of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Susan L. Dorgan, in her Capacity as the Commissioner of the Vermont Department of Regulation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></i>The case is currently pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></i><span style="font-family: Calibri;">At issue is whether Vermont’s Health Care Database” statute is preempted by ERISA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Among other things, the statute requires health insurers, providers, facilities and government agencies to “file reports, data, schedules, statistics, or other information determined by the commissioner.” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The term “health insurer” is defined broadly to include any administrator of a self-insured group health plans, including third party administrators and pharmacy benefit managers.<o:p></o:p></span></div><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span></o:p><br /><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The purpose of these requirements is to enable the state to build a comprehensive database it believes is necessary in order to effectively carry out health care administration functions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Liberty Mutual, a self-insured employer, refused to provide the requested data.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The company subsequently sued the state, arguing that the collection and reporting of the requested data created administrative burdens for the plans, therefore triggering ERISA preemption.<o:p></o:p></span><br /><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Siding with the state, a federal trial court judge granted summary judgment, finding that the Vermont law did not affect ERISA plan administration and further concluding that it was appropriate for the state to regulate in this area.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Admittedly, ERISA preemption law can be complicated and highly technical in many cases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In this regard, to be charitable, we suppose that a good faith argument could be made the requirements set forth<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>in this stature do not, in fact, affect plan administration so criticism of the state should be put in proper context – a disagreement on legal and policy grounds.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The DOL’s participation is another matter.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>By putting its large thumb on the scale, an ambitious political agenda is exposed for those who care to notice.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">As the agency primarily responsible for administrating and enforcing ERISA, DOL has historically defended the law’s broad federal preemption provisions. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But with its provocative interpretation that Vermont is essentially regulating the business of insurance (the key exception to ERISA preemption), DOL has clearly signaled it has changed course, presumably to support the Administration’s implicit objective of squeezing the private health care marketplace when possible and where few people are watching.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">We commented recently that Tom Perez’s nomination as secretary of DOL portended a more political agency.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Given that he was subsequently confirmed after this Amicus brief was filed, his fingerprints aren’t on this one but it can be reasonably concluded that under his watch the DOL will continue to back Vermont if the case is ultimately heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">And so it goes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A huge federal bureaucracy quietly imposes the Administration’s political will in ways too nuanced to attract attention.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But that’s where the real action is.<o:p></o:p></span></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-83653699382891402332013-07-12T10:21:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:22:23.879-08:00TRIA Captives and Republican Politics <span style="font-family: Calibri;">With the current version of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) set to expire at the end of next year unless Congress takes affirmative action to extend it, one thing has become clear already: the politics are complicated. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>More specifically, the Republican caucus in the House of Representatives appears to be divided as to whether the federal government should continue to play a role in the private insurance marketplace.<o:p></o:p></span><br /> <br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Those with an interest in the continued viability of TRIA captives should pay attention because this is shaping up to be a very fluid and uncertain legislative process.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But before getting too far into the political weeds, a quick historical refresher would probably be helpful.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">TRIA was first passed by Congress on a bipartisan basis in 2002 with the intent of helping to stabilize the property insurance marketplace in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Act created a reinsurance program providing for a federal backstop for industry losses exceeding $100 million per year connected with future terrorist attacks.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The program details are that 85% of insured losses would be paid by the federal government after an insurer meets a deductible of 20% of annual premiums.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For losses up to $27.5 billion, the Treasury Department will collect 133% of payouts through surcharges on property/casualty policies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Regulators have been given discretion to develop specifics to recoup payouts in access of $27.5 billion. <o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Act was extended without much opposition in 2005 and 2007 so what’s different this time around?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Those votes were cast prior to the 2010 congressional election, which swept into office many “Tea Party” Republicans and Democratic control was upended in the House.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">There is no shortage of commentary with regard to whether or not the growing influence of these small government true believers within the House Republican Caucus is good for the party over the longer term so this blog will refrain from offering similar political commentary.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">What we can say with some certainty is the emerging debate over TRIA re-authorization is exposing the same type of divide among Tea Party and “establishment” Republicans that has been seen repeatedly over the past three years on high profile legislation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sometimes the party coalesced and other times it did not.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The current TRIA extension legislation (H.R. 508) is now pending in the House Financial Services Committee, which is chaired by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While a member of the party leadership, his conservative political orientation more often than not synchs with the Tea Party Caucus.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Clearing Hensarling’s committee is the first step to final enactment, but while the congressman has not explicitly ruled out moving the legislation, he has signaled real skepticism of maintaining the federal government’s role in the private insurance market, even in the cases of terrorism.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">In recent meetings with Republican members of the committee (most of whom were not in Congress when the law was originally passed in 2002), industry lobbyists have confirmed conflicting positions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some acknowledge that practical marketplace realities dictate the extension, while others have indicated they will oppose the legislation, citing the overriding priority of reducing the size and scope of the federal government.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For their part, House Democrats are mostly sitting back at this point while the Republican politics play out. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt;">Obviously there is still quite a bit of time on the game clock for congressional action and political ideology could very well yield to practical realities, but it’s risky to simply assume another TRIA extension will be pro forma.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>After all, if Congress can go to the brink over raising the debt ceiling, tax hikes and budget sequesters, why should we think that H.R. 508 will be pushed over the finish line by the tailwind from previous years?<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"> </span></o:p></span></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-85547548096971403272013-07-04T08:50:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:22:23.887-08:00ACA Gobbles Up Self-Insurance Marketplace One Bite at a Time <br /><span style="font-family: Calibri;">This week’s announcement that the ACA’s employer-mandate provision has been postponed has understandably gotten a lot of attention.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It’s a big deal for sure, but while federal regulators punted on this high profile provision, they demonstrated no such caution with the release of two sets of final rules over the past week that will have the likely effect of eroding the self-insurance marketplace.<o:p></o:p></span><br /> <br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">So while everyone is talking about the employer-mandate development, it’s important to interject some exclusive reporting and commentary regarding separate finalized ACA rules related to contraceptive coverage and student health plans to demonstrate how self-insurance options are being quietly restricted in certain market segments.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The rule-making process for contraceptive coverage has certainly attracted much attention over the past two years, but this blog is agnostic regarding the ongoing religious liberty debate that dominates the headlines.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We have, however, been very interested in how the final rules will affect self-insured religious organizations, of which there are many.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">As some may recall, when the controversy originally erupted over the prospect of religious organizations being forced to provide coverage for contraceptive coverage, Obama’s political operatives quickly hatched a plan: insurance companies would be required to include this coverage at no cost to the religious organizations.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Notwithstanding the fact that this accommodation failed to satisfy religious liberty objections, the White House overlooked the fact that a large percentage of religious organizations operate self-insured group health plans, so the suggested insurance company fix would not apply to these plans.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Faced with this realization, regulators have floated various proposals during the rule-making process on how self-insured religious organizations can comply with the law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Most of these proposals have been variations on the theme of forcing third party administrators to take responsibility for coordinating such coverage.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">For good measure, regulators offered a closing comment in the proposed rules essentially saying that such organizations can always convert to fully-insured arrangements if self-insurance is no longer viable.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You have to appreciate such bureaucratic thoughtfulness.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Based on the final rules released last week, it appears that the viability of self-insured plans will be significantly compromised.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>At issue is that regulators are forcing TPAs to serve as plan fiduciaries solely for the purpose of arranging separate contraceptive coverage for plan participants.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Industry stakeholders have raised numerous concerns that such an approach is legally questionable and would expose TPAs to a variety of legal liability scenarios.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But the regulators flatly rejected these comments, asserting that “the Department of Labor’s view that is has the legal authority to require the third party administrator to become the plan administrator under ERISA section 3(16) for the sole purpose of providing payments for contraceptive services if the third party administrator agrees to enter into or remain in a contractual relationship with the eligible organization to provide administrative services for the plan.” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Already acutely sensitive to potential fiduciary designations outside of the ACA context, it’s a reasonable conclusion that at least some TPAs will consider the new rules to be a tipping point, forcing them to part ways with their religious organization clients, which in turn will make it more difficult for such organizations to maintain their self-insured plans.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">In separate news, CMS published the final rule last week clarifying exemptions to the individual mandate requirement in as provided for in the ACA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As part of this, the rule also contained the final language on which "non-insurance” programs will be considered minimum essential coverage (MEC) for purposes of satisfying the mandate.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The earlier, proposed version of the rule had included self-funded student health plans in the list of allowable MECs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Under the final version of the rule, however, self-funded student plans will only be considered MEC for plan years beginning before December 31, 2014.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>After that date, such plans will have to apply to CMS to maintain the exemption. <o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Given the explicit goal of the Administration to steer as many young and healthy individuals into the exchanges as possible, this blog is highly skeptical that such exemptions will be forthcoming.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And of course, the real effect of this rule won’t be felt until after the 2014 elections.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">We’ll concede the fact that student health plans and religious organizations do not represent major segments of the overall self-insurance marketplace, but they are viable segments that are being quietly gobbled up by the bureaucracy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So while everyone understandably is now talking about the employer-mandate delay, much of the real action continues to be in the details of the highly technical ACA implementation rules that cannot be easily distilled by the media nor understood by most health care reform observers.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-71081397759429515232013-06-20T12:35:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:25:43.650-08:00Employment Practices Liability <br /><div class="Pa0" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span class="A3"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">A popular insurance text starts with, “The growth of federal and state legislation dealing with employment discrimination and sexual harassment, the changing legal views on wrongful termination, and the increasing tendency of aggrieved parties to turn to the courts for settlement of such disputes have caused insurers to specifically exclude coverage for such employment-related claims in the commercial general liability policy.” <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div><br /><div class="Pa0" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXcoXcIg3b_djCHz92YwFt3FaPZWijl1dTCAiYSgDhE0UziqFyWUyRnzN5zhFvFQ-jzmUc5xc3OWKBzhSeJkhWS3L8IBFn6UDOrt_LBT1LOAC9t8ImxaHTsrTMAH3MYUrZ6oQ1gT3dk_4/s1600/MP900400367%5B1%5D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXcoXcIg3b_djCHz92YwFt3FaPZWijl1dTCAiYSgDhE0UziqFyWUyRnzN5zhFvFQ-jzmUc5xc3OWKBzhSeJkhWS3L8IBFn6UDOrt_LBT1LOAC9t8ImxaHTsrTMAH3MYUrZ6oQ1gT3dk_4/s320/MP900400367%5B1%5D.jpg" width="213" /></a><span class="A3"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">To fill this gap, a number of insurers are offering employment practices liability (EPL) coverage as an endorsement to the commercial general liability policy or as a stand-alone policy. Independently developed by each company, the EPL coverage forms vary by company, however, most policies are similar in terms and conditions. </span></span></span></div><br /><div class="Pa0" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span class="A3"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">EPL policies are usually written on a claims-made basis, which means that for a claim to be covered, it must occur during the policy term. Extended reporting periods from one to three years can be added for an additional premium. <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div><br /><div class="Pa0" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span class="A3"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">In addition to damages paid for judgments or settlements, the cost of defense is covered. However, it is usually paid from the limit of liability, not in addition to the limit of liability. Most EPL policies specifically cover back pay. Back pay is commonly awarded to successful claimants in discrimination and wrongful termination actions. </span></span></span></div><br /><div class="Pa0" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span class="A3"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Typically, the definition of “insured” in an EPL policy includes the corporation, its directors and officers, its employees, and, in most policies, its former employees. Some policies limit the definition of “insured” to include only managerial employees. <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span class="A3"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">The deductible for this coverage ranges from $1,000 to $250,000, depending on underwriting factors. One difference from other types of policies is that the EPL policy usually requires the insured to participate in losses exceeding the deductible. The amount that the insured contributes after the deductible has been satisfied is based on the “participation rate.” Participation rates are usually 5 to 10 percent, but can reach as high as 25 percent depending on underwriting factors.</span></span><o:p></o:p></span></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-86204336299787786292013-06-10T11:36:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:22:23.894-08:00 <br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Health Care Claims Tax to Live on in Michigan</span></b><br /> <br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Some fresh reporting from Michigan indicates that there is still quite a bit of certainty ahead for a health care tax scheme with big ERISA preemption considerations as it ropes in self-insured group health plans.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(See 11/23/12 blog post for prior reporting on this subject.)<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">While industry observers wait on a federal appeals court to rule on whether the state state’s Health Insurance Claims Act (HICA) violates federal law, there is one open question that appears to be settled, which is that the tax will not sunset at the end of the year as originally intended.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Governor Snyder is expected to sign legislation (SB 335) as early as this week that will extend the sunset provision for four years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So this “temporary” tax sure has a permanent feel to it.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">A proposal to hike the one percent tax was stripped from the legislation but that does not necessarily mean that it not going happen.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That’s because the Legislature has finalized the state’s 2013-2014 budget assuming $400 million in revenue coming from the HICA tax.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The problem is that number likely overestimates revenue by at least $130 million based on the current year’s tax receipts.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Legislators hope to fill this revenue gap by tweaking the state’s no fault auto insurance system and related new vehicle fees, but if this is not done by October, they will be forced to pass what is known as a “negative supplemental appropriates bill” and the heat with again be on again to increase the HICA tax. <o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;">And keep in mind that there is a two-to-one match from the federal government for all state revenue raise through the HICA tax, so a multiplier effect is in play, which further intensifies the pressure to maintain and increase the tax.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That said, It is sometimes easy to tune out when reading about predictable legislative maneuvering and lose focus on the real world implications, so let’s do that quickly now. <o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Last year, this blog spoke to a major multi-self-insured employer based on Michigan to gage how they have adapted to the HICA tax.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The response regarding the economic affect was largely expected – essentially that it raised the cost of doing business but that it has not prompted them to reconsider being self-insured.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Their response regarding the compliance administrative burden was more telling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While they have been able to figure how to comply with the law, if similar tax schemes pop up in other states the administrative burden will not grow i<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">ncrementally</i>, but rather <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">exponentially </i>and will force them to take another look at whether self-insurance is still the best option for them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That’s compelling.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Absence intervention by a federal appeals court, it will be interesting to see whether this ERISA preemption assault can be quarantined with the Michigan state lines.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-44437284595566762302013-05-09T07:24:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:25:43.658-08:00ACV vs Stated Amount vs Agreed Values for VehiclesEvery time you get into your car and start the engine it is very likely that pennies fall off. Well, not actual pennies but the value of the car drops a very small amount each mile it is driven. This is because most cars are a depreciating asset. With this in mind let's talk about three common ways you can insure the value of your vehicle. The three ways are Actual Cash<br />Value (ACV), Stated Amount and Agreed Value.<br /><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEit7Vq0bRkxndcWiGSf2_7QzPozu2f66PPkuskfn2lo9cNjGlYYGoJkyL1YMMhiBwAd6Kynf9cZO6Gx9uV_B3SclIq6m0nIJ25HtHF-dsSBpKF4JiFT5auSKqzDmDjyuzAoBIzrrLYZc8E/s1600/car.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="238" mwa="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEit7Vq0bRkxndcWiGSf2_7QzPozu2f66PPkuskfn2lo9cNjGlYYGoJkyL1YMMhiBwAd6Kynf9cZO6Gx9uV_B3SclIq6m0nIJ25HtHF-dsSBpKF4JiFT5auSKqzDmDjyuzAoBIzrrLYZc8E/s320/car.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Actual Cash Value is the most common form of valuing a car by insurance companies. What this means is that after an accident they take the original value of the car when it was brand new and they then depreciate the car over time until the date of the claim. They taking into account the miles driven, prior damage to the vehicle, wear and tear and maintenance upkeep of the vehicle. The farther away you are from the date the car was made the lower the value of the car. </div><br />Stated Amount is a little bit different. In this case you would tell the insurance company what you feel your vehicle is worth, say $30,000. This $30,000 is now the most the insurance company will pay out for the car, however when you have a claim they will research to see what other vehicles similar to yours are being valued for. If that value is less than the $30,000 they will give you the lesser amount. You often see this in collectors cars or cars that have a lot of specialize equipment attached to the body of the vehicle.<br /><br />Agreed Value is where both the insurance company and you come to a prearranged value for your vehicle. When you agree upon this value, say it is $30,000 again, when a claim arises you are going to automatically be paid the agreed upon value of $30,000. Unlike Stated Amount, they do not go out and decide if the market still feels your car is worth a certain amount, they just agree to pay the agreed upon value that was settled before the claim even happened. This is most used for classic/collector cars. In fact it is best to make sure your classic/collector car is an Agreed Value instead of a State Amount. Often this requires an appraisal which may cost a little money to have done. One other thing to take into account when vehicles are insured for an Agreed Value, they can often have a limit on how many miles the vehicle can be driven each year. <br /><br />For more information on valuations of vehicles please feel free to get in touch with <a href="http://www.feyinsurance.com/" target="_blank">Fey Insurance Services</a>. We have been serving the Oxford, OH and Cincinnati, OH areas since 1958. <br /><br />jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-83751455946243640832013-03-18T13:49:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:22:23.902-08:00Labor Department Pick Signals New Concern for Self-Insurance Industry <span style="font-family: Calibri;">The announcement today that President Obama has nominated Tom Perez as the next Secretary of Labor arguably sets the stage for a strong federal push to restrict the ability of thousands of employers nationwide from sponsoring self-insured group health plans.<o:p></o:p></span><br /> <br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">This provocative conclusion requires the connection of several dots, so we’ll lay them out for your consideration.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">As this blog has reported previously, federal regulators have been asking lots of questions about self-insured group plans since the passage of the ACA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>More specifically, they are trying to determine whether smaller self-insured employers that purchase stop-loss insurance with “low” attachment points constitute a “loophole” to the health care law and that these employers are somehow “gaming” the system.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">We’ve methodically discredited these assertions multiple times, but it’s important to set the stage as new developments are reported and additional context is provided.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Since insurance is largely regulated at the state level, the obvious question arises regarding how the feds can regulate stop-loss insurance should they wish to do so?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This can clearly be done through federal legislation or potentially through regulation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The regulatory route is more complicated as the ACA does not provide any explicit statutory authority for such action.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But regulators can be a creative bunch, especially under the current Administration.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The creative theory is that federal agencies with jurisdiction over the Public Health Services Act (PHSA) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) may rely on the their general rule-making authority given to them under their respective laws to argue that the federal government may indeed need to regulate stop-loss insurance and re-characterize stop-loss policies with “low” attachment points as “health insurance” through regulations separate and apart from the new law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">While this action would be controversial and subject to challenge by Congress and private citizens, it is possible that a rule-making process could be initiated to achieve this policy objective.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Based on discussion with key regulators as recently as last week, such a rule-making process is unlikely to occur this year.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This blog speculates that the primary consideration for inaction at this point is that regulators are simply overwhelmed with finalizing all of the rules and related guidance required for full ACA implementation at the end of this year.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Once these deadlines pass, however, the regulators will have more bandwidth to circle back on ancillary areas of interest.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Here’s where we connect the dot with Mr. Perez’ name on it.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">While the career professional staffers within DOL (non-political appointees) are competent and at least reasonably objective in most cases, the new agency head is anything but.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Mr. Perez comes with baggage from his tenure within the Justin Department where evidence strongly suggests that at least some of his civil rights enforcement decisions were influenced by political considerations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In short, he a “social justice” guy who fits nicely into the Administration’s template for policy-making.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">His resume also includes a stint with HHS under the Clinton Administration and a senior staff position with the late Senator Ted Kennedy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rounding out his big government pedigree, he is a graduate of Harvard Law School and the George Washington Public School of Health.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">All of this background suggests that Mr. Perez will be inclined to position DOL as a more activist agency with regard to health care reform issues, including stop-loss insurance regulation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This motivation will likely be particularly acute if the SHOP exchanges run into early problems with lack of enrollment as many experts predict.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">For the sake of discussion, let’s assume this analysis is correct.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In this case, then Secretary Perez could push for a rule-making process as described earlier, or perhaps lead an effort to close the self-insurance “loophole” through federal legislation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Let’s connect another dot.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">As a technical matter this would a “cleaner” approach and not subject to legal challenge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Congress could simply enact legislation amending the definition of “health insurance” under the PHSA, ERISA and the Code to include, for example stop-loss policies with a “low” attachment point.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Given that Republicans control the House right now and are generally supportive of self-insurance, the politics do not support this potential strategy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But if you believe recent public commentaries that the Administration’s grand political plan is focused on the objective of Democrats winning back control of the House in 2014, the legislative pathway becomes clearer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Und this scenario, it’s hard to imagine that a Secretary Perez would not push for a legislative “fix.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>After all, it’s not fair that some citizens are saved from the exchanges in favor of receiving quality health benefits from their employers, right? <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Social justice, indeed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">And the last dot is connected.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-37184107788644985942013-03-18T13:42:00.000-07:002014-01-19T04:22:23.910-08:00The Coming Crossroads for LRRA Legislation <span style="font-family: Calibri;">It’s been a while since we’ve reported on efforts to modernize the Liability Risk Retention Act through federal legislation, but there may be some new developments this spring worth discussing.<o:p></o:p></span><br /> <br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">A key congressional source confirmed today that draft legislation is currently being vetted in the House prior to potential introduction in the next month or two.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While previous versions of the bill included a federal arbitration provision to address situations where non-domiciliary regulators take actions against RRGs operating in their state that should be preempted by the LRRA, this provision will not be included in this year’s bill if it introduced.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">This is largely a political consideration, as the chairman of the House Financial Services is extremely sensitive about any legislation that can be viewed as expanding the role of the federal government in the regulation of insurance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This blog takes the contrary view in that such a provision actually strengthens the home state regulator, but the politics are what they are.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">With the arbitration provision stripped out, the main focus of the bill will be to allow RRGs to write commercial property coverage.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In anticipation of this expected development, several captive insurance leaders were polled to take their temperature on the relative importance of such a change to the LRRA.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The feedback was mixed evidenced by the sampling of responses as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><u><span style="font-family: Calibri;">On The One Hand….<o:p></o:p></span></u></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“I think ART as an industry needs as many tools as possible in the toolbox and any victory we can get, however small, is a step in the right direction.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“I would like to see this pass because people keep thinking this only expands to commercial property – not so – it would allow auto physical damage.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><u><span style="font-family: Calibri;">On the Other Hand….<o:p></o:p></span></u></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“I’m of the opinion that RRGs time as a viable ART risk funding mechanism is waning.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I say this because of the NAIC’s accelerating aggressiveness in its attempt to impose governance standards on RRG domiciliary states equal to or greater than those imposed on traditional insurance companies.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Even with reinsurance backing the level of property risk undertaken by an RRG is not likely to create the beneficial impact for RRG members compared to the liability segment.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></i><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">So for an industry that can be apathetic when it comes to federal legislative/regulatory developments, even when everyone is in agreement, it will be interesting to see if any meaningful support materializes if/when LRRA legislation version 2.0 is introduced given differing opinions on the relative importance.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Given that the probability of a 3.0 version anytime in the foreseeable future is close to zero, get ready for the crossroads.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></i></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-35217315689111424692013-03-07T07:18:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:25:43.666-08:00Rough Notes Teen Driving Video<!-- Start of Brightcove Player --><br /><div style="display: none;"></div>Having a child that is just starting to drive can be very stressful. As a parent you will worry about them everytime they step into the driver's side of a car. The only thing you can do, though, is to educate your new driver as best you can. Rough Notes created an educational video for new drivers. It focus on insurance but also talks about being responsible. This is a great video to show new drivers. <!-- By use of this code snippet, I agree to the Brightcove Publisher T and C found at https://accounts.brightcove.com/en/terms-and-conditions/. --><script language="JavaScript" src="http://admin.brightcove.com/js/BrightcoveExperiences.js" type="text/javascript"></script><br /><br /><br /><object class="BrightcoveExperience" id="myExperience1067646112001"> <param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /> <param name="width" value="480" /> <param name="height" value="270" /> <param name="playerID" value="1106227567001" /> <param name="playerKey" value="AQ~~,AAAAzyoTftk~,b4AqzaoHcl_I3QRUtbo21y3-Go9w9jIb" /> <param name="isVid" value="true" /> <param name="isUI" value="true" /> <param name="dynamicStreaming" value="true" /> <param name="@videoPlayer" value="1067646112001" /></object> <!-- This script tag will cause the Brightcove Players defined above it to be created as soon as the line is read by the browser. If you wish to have the player instantiated only after the rest of the HTML is processed and the page load is complete, remove the line. --><script type="text/javascript">brightcove.createExperiences();</script><!-- End of Brightcove Player -->jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-34510581934080554412013-02-21T13:34:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:25:43.674-08:00Certificates of Insurance<div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjd9y0V9i-BiJHVmClBoFa_cIr95dJqXSsUnk4sde-Dy8jKIcmbguqf-eVCUKee0AyT0KPrk72sIjRpOpN78R2HKyyylUwa2lWGKEulxVs1_NbWI_f3Sq21ltRGL5f034xmlM4u3OwkFLI/s1600/sample%2520certificate%2520of%2520insurance.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" mea="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjd9y0V9i-BiJHVmClBoFa_cIr95dJqXSsUnk4sde-Dy8jKIcmbguqf-eVCUKee0AyT0KPrk72sIjRpOpN78R2HKyyylUwa2lWGKEulxVs1_NbWI_f3Sq21ltRGL5f034xmlM4u3OwkFLI/s320/sample%2520certificate%2520of%2520insurance.jpg" width="249" /></a></div>It is good risk management for customers to check and make sure their vendors have insurance. Because of this small business owners are often asked to prove to their customers they do indeed have insurance. When customers ask for proof of insurance what they are often asking for is a form called a certificate of insurance. A certificate of insurance gives the basic information of a business insurance policy. It tells things such as the insurance company's name, dates the policy covers, name of the insurance agency who handles the policy and highlights the different types of liability coverages the policy has and the limits or amount of insurance in each of those coverages.<br /><br />Any type of business can be asked to provide a certificate of insurance. Three areas where you see certificates of insurance most commonly asked for are construction and maintenance contractors, businesses that lease space and consultants. The reason that construction and maintenance contractors are often asked to show certificates of insurance are because their customers want to be sure if they cause injury around their premises or damage around their premises that they are covered. Also, many contractors are acting as subcontractors to other construction and maintenance companies. If their subs cause damage or injury they want to be sure they have insurance because if they do not they will then be the responsible ones.<br /><br />People that lease space are asked for certificates because the owner of the building wants to make sure that if they cause damage to the building they have insurance to put the building back as it was prior to incident that caused damage. They also want to make sure if the person leasing space is responsible for someones injuries while they are visiting the building that they have insurance in place to cover those injuries.<br /><br />Consultants are asked to provide certificates of insurance in order to meet contract requirements. Often, consultants sign a contract with their customers and in the contract there is always an insurance section that outlines the required coverages they must have. The best way for that customer to make sure the consultant is meeting the requirements is to ask for a certificate of insurance.<br /><br />So the next time you are asked by a customer to show proof of insurance you will understand that you are being asked for a certificate of insurance. Contact your agent and let them know you need a certificate of insurance. Make sure to provide them with the name and address of the company or individual that is asking you for the certificate. <br /><br />jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-50219291405344503582013-02-14T08:55:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:25:43.682-08:00Rough Notes Homeowner VideoThe Rough Notes production department has put together a wonderful video that goes over the basics of a homeowner insurance policy and how it protects your house. This is a great video for any homeowner to view, especially someone buying a house for the first time.<br /><br /><!-- Start of Brightcove Player --><br /><div style="display: none;"></div><!-- By use of this code snippet, I agree to the Brightcove Publisher T and C found at https://accounts.brightcove.com/en/terms-and-conditions/. --><script language="JavaScript" src="http://admin.brightcove.com/js/BrightcoveExperiences.js" type="text/javascript"></script><object class="BrightcoveExperience" id="myExperience1107419545001"> <param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /> <param name="width" value="480" /> <param name="height" value="270" /> <param name="playerID" value="1106227567001" /> <param name="playerKey" value="AQ~~,AAAAzyoTftk~,b4AqzaoHcl_I3QRUtbo21y3-Go9w9jIb" /> <param name="isVid" value="true" /> <param name="isUI" value="true" /> <param name="dynamicStreaming" value="true" /> <param name="@videoPlayer" value="1107419545001" /></object> <!-- This script tag will cause the Brightcove Players defined above it to be created as soon as the line is read by the browser. If you wish to have the player instantiated only after the rest of the HTML is processed and the page load is complete, remove the line. --><script type="text/javascript">brightcove.createExperiences();</script><!-- End of Brightcove Player -->jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-58429625445402277952013-02-05T07:47:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:25:43.692-08:00To Shovel or Not to Shovel? Here's the law in Ohio<em>This is an article posted on "Ohio Insurance Institutes" website:</em><br /><br />As far as Ohio law goes, homeowners don’t have a legal obligation to shovel sidewalks due to a natural accumulation of snow and ice, but this doesn’t mean you shouldn’t at least try to maintain them. <br /><br /><br />In December 1993 the Ohio Supreme Court upheld this law when a guest attempted to sue a homeowner in Franklin County for a slip and fall outside of the homeowner’s house.<br /><br />In the case <a href="http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/1993/1993-ohio-72.pdf">Brinkman v. Ross</a>, the court ruled that you are walking at your own risk when Mother Nature calls. The case stemmed from a visit by the Brinkman’s to the home of the Ross’ in February 1989. Ms. Brinkman slipped outside the Ross home breaking her ankle. She sued her hosts in Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. The court threw out the complaint, indicating that it had long been established that Ohio homeowners are not obligated to remove natural accumulations of snow and ice.<br /><br />The decision was reversed in the court of appeals, saying that if a homeowner knows of a hazardous condition and invites guests to visit, there is an obligation to at least warn them. The case then went to the Ohio Supreme Court where the judgment was overturned.<br /><br />It’s up to your guests and other pedestrians to assume that due to the nature of Ohio winters, there’s always a risk of a slip or fall due to the natural accumulation of ice and snow.<br /><br /><br /><strong>Local snow removal ordinances</strong><br /><strong><br /></strong>Local municipalities may invoke snow removal ordinances. If your city or township has an ordinance that requires residents to keep walkways free of snow and ice, then you have a responsibility to maintain your sidewalks. Some Ohio cities with snow removal ordinances levy fines for not removing snow in a timely manner while others issue warnings. <br /><br />However, a local ordinance does not automatically implicate a homeowner if someone slips and falls on their uncleared property.<br /><br /><strong>Examples of local snow removal ordinances/requirements</strong><br />Below are links to information and/or ordinances for a handful of Ohio communities. The Ohio Insurance Institute suggests checking with your local municipality on any snow removal policies or requirements. Many provide this information online.<br /><br />• <a href="http://www.centervilleohio.gov/centweb/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=711&Itemid=1236">Centerville</a><br /><br />• <a href="http://dublinohiousa.gov/services/snow-removal/">Dublin </a><br /><br />• <a href="https://www.forestpark.org/department/index.php?fDD=10-0">Forest Park</a> <br /><br />• <a href="http://www.fairfield-city.org/publicworks/sidewalksnow.cfm">Fairfield</a><br /><br /><br /><br />jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-9474737560924726022012-12-21T12:55:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:25:43.702-08:00Waiver of Subrogation, What is it? <div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZsX81R_sxEMWH2otTNjdUMErZatnpeWM86zb25gIcX80j7PCkDmcm2vNUT-YO7gZYK3ZFmj3EdmXmupMDcUgiogG5Uf3wDGPcUn3Kjy3o5SoPHUyw2POwtfBDofQFCrjJLb3aJpLxYas/s1600/MP900438585%5B1%5D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" eea="true" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZsX81R_sxEMWH2otTNjdUMErZatnpeWM86zb25gIcX80j7PCkDmcm2vNUT-YO7gZYK3ZFmj3EdmXmupMDcUgiogG5Uf3wDGPcUn3Kjy3o5SoPHUyw2POwtfBDofQFCrjJLb3aJpLxYas/s320/MP900438585%5B1%5D.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>If after an insurance claim is paid out by your insurance company, it is deemed that another party was actually the negligent one, then your insurance company (via the insurance policy contract) has the right to go after the negligent party. This right is usually found in the "Conditions" section of your insurance policy. This conditional right can, however, be waived. This means that your insurance company would then not be allowed to go after the negligent party. The term for this waiving of rights is called Wavier of Subrogation.<br /><br />Often you will see the Waiver of Subrogation in commercial leases. Landlords will require that tenants have this verbiage in their insurance policy so that if a claim occurs at the leased location that the tenant's insurance company cannot come back after them for damages. The landlord, however, would be less inclined to have this wording on their policy since it would mean they and their insurance company would not be allowed to go after their tenant after a claim. A building owner and their insurance company usually have more to lose (the building and its rental income) than the tenant does so they would be very interested in being able to go back after a negligent party.<br /><br />There are two example of where a landlord may want the Waiver of Subrogation wording on their own insurance policy. The first is if they are renting to a family member or friend who they know doesn't either have enough assets or money to be able to cover them in case of a claim, they may not want their insurance company to be able to go after them to collect for damages. The second is if the landlord and tenant are owned by the same person or organization. In some cases, usually for legal or tax reasons, a person may have one company that owns the building and another company that owns the business that is the tenant. In those cases you would probably want both the landlord and tenant policy to have a Waiver of Subrogation clause in their policies so that you don't have your two insurance companies fighting over payout. <br /><br />Another place where you will see Wavier of Subrogation is in situations where companies or organizations will subcontract work to other companies or organizations. Often, if a business is going to hire another business to do work on their behalf they will request that the subcontractor have Wavier of Subrogation on their policy. Similar to the Landlord/Tenant relationship, if the contractor requires the subcontractor to have Waiver of Subrogation on their policy it means the subcontractor, if a claim arises, is not able to go back after the contractor for money. <br /><br />When entering into a lease or a business contract it is important to know if you are going to be required to have Waiver of Subrogation and if you have it or not in your insurance policy. It is best to have both your legal team and your insurance professionals review contracts to make sure you are adequately protected.<br /><br /><br /><br />jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-27960953203211328852012-11-23T10:05:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:22:23.918-08:00Michigan Health Care Claims Tax Fight -- Additional Rounds Ahead<span style="font-family: Calibri;">It’s been a tough fight thus far in opposition to the Michigan Health Insurance Claims Assessment Act, which imposes a one percent (1%) assessment on all health care payers, including self-insured employers and certain business partners, for medical services rendered to Michigan residents in the state of Michigan.<o:p></o:p></span><br /><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">As this blog has previously reported, business groups in Michigan signed off on the legislation last year noting it was part of a larger budget deal that was not as bad as possible alternatives.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>ERISA preemption concerns were outweighed by the belief that self-insured employers could absorb the new tax without much disruption.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Then in August of this year, a federal district court in Michigan dismissed an ERISA preemption lawsuit, which contended that the administrative obligations imposed by the Act are unlawful.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span><br /><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Game over?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Well, not exactly.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">An appeal of the District’s court ruling has just by filed with the Sixth Circuit Court Appeals and incorporates some very strong arguments to justify a reversal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And this time, the self-insurance industry will have an unlikely ally in this legal fight – organized labor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">What has not been widely recognized is that the tax applies to self-insured Taft-Hartley plans and the ERISA preemption argument is even stronger as it relates to these plans.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So it is a positive development that at least two Taft-Hartley plans are expected file amicus briefs next week.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">But while more pressure is being applied in Federal Court, things are heating back up in the Michigan State Legislature to make the tax significantly more onerous.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Act was structured based on the assumption that it would raise $400 in annual revenue from all payers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Of course, government budgeting is often suspect and Michigan bureaucrats have lived up to this reputation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Through the first half of 2012, the state collected only $109 million from the health claims tax, which means the annualized estimate is short nearly $200 million.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">So it should not come as any surprise that the Michigan Legislature is now considering a proposal during a lame duck session to significantly hike the tax.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>SB 1359, introduced earlier this month, would allow for an unlimited and variable rate on the claims tax so that it would float up and down to ensure that the tax generates $400 million annually.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The bill would also eliminate the proportional credit/refund provision should the tax collect more than the $400 million target amount. <o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Interestingly, state business groups who provided tacit approval to the tax last year have now launched an aggressive lobbying effort to defeat the proposed 2.0 version.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We’ll see if labor groups join the cause.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">While it’s certainly encouraging that there is strong push back against SB 1359, the opposition remains focused on the economic argument.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yes, this is clearly important but arguably not as important as the ERISA preemption issue.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">We’ll concede that the most self-insured employers in Michigan have figured out how to comply with this new tax obligation, but multi-state employers will also tell you that if other states implement a similar tax scheme this would greatly complicate compliance efforts.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In turn, this could make the self-insurance option much less attractive – a particularly troubling development in the post-ACA world where self-insurance offers a critical safe harbor.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Look around.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Most states have budget challenges, especially as it relates to health care obligations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If the Michigan tax withstands legal and legislative challenges then we should not be surprised if other states attempt the same approach.<o:p></o:p></span></div><span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Calibri;">So the stakes are high in Michigan as it is now ground zero in the ERISA preemption fight.<o:p></o:p></span>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-9071218685919894552012-11-21T06:37:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:25:43.792-08:00Thanksgiving Safety Tips from NFPA<span class="body">Here is an article from the <a href="http://www.nfpa.org/index.asp">National Fire Protection Association</a> (NFPA) on Thanksgiving Safety Tips. From our family here at Fey Insurance Services to yours, have a wonderful and safe Thanksgiving! </span><br /><br /><span class="body"><a href="http://www.nfpa.org/itemDetail.asp?categoryID=2117&itemID=49664&URL=Safety%20Information/For%20consumers/Holidays/Thanksgiving%20safety&cookie%5Ftest=1">THANKSGIVING SAFETY TIPS</a></span><br /><span class="body">The kitchen is the heart of the home, especially at</span> <span class="body">Thanksgiving. Kids love to be involved in holiday preparations. Safety in the kitchen is important, especially on Thanksgiving Day when there is a lot of activity and people at home.</span><br /><br />Safety tips:<br /><br /><br />•Stay in the kitchen when you are cooking on the stovetop so you can keep an eye on the food.<br /><br />•Stay in the home when cooking your turkey and check on it frequently.<br /><br />•Keep children away from the stove. The stove will be hot and kids should stay 3 feet away.<br /><br />•Make sure kids stay away from hot food and liquids. The steam or splash from vegetables, gravy or coffee could cause serious burns.<br /><br />•Keep the floor clear so you don’t trip over kids, toys, pocketbooks or bags.<br /><br />•Keep knives out of the reach of children.<br /><br />•Be sure electric cords from an electric knife, coffee maker, plate warmer or mixer are not dangling off the counter within easy reach of a child.<br /><br />•Keep matches and utility lighters out of the reach of children — up high in a locked cabinet.<br /><br />•Never leave children alone in room with a lit a candle.<br /><br />•Make sure your smoke alarms are working. Test them by pushing the test buttonjazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-6144602440043769432012-11-17T05:56:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:22:23.925-08:00Captives & Dodd-Frank -- Hitting the Right Target<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The recent announcement of an industry coalition to push for federal legislation clarifying that the Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act (NRRA), included as part of the Dodd-Frank law, does not apply to captive insurance companies certainly sounds like a positive initiative.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But despite good intentions, this blog is skeptical that it will acheive the desired result.</span><br /><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">We have actually been tracking this issue for some time and is aware of discussions that have taken place with key congressional sources regarding the viability of a possible legislative fix (two conversations as recent as yesterday).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The consensus is that it could be done technically, but DC politics dictate that such an effort would be a heavy lift.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The political reality is that neither Democrats nor Republicans have the appetite to open up the Dodd-Frank Law for any changes at this point.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Truth be told, congressional Republicans don’t want to do anything to help the law actually work, as this was a highly partisan piece of legislation, much like the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The only way Republicans would be motivated to even consider amending the legislation is if such action would substantively lessen the administrative burdens on the banking industry and provide certainty to the business community, especially small business.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></b><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Democrats, for their part, will be resistant to “technical amendment” legislation even if they support it in principle for fear that it would become a legislative vehicle where additional amendments would be grafted on with the intent of watering down the law.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">And neither party wants to come back under fire from the powerful financial services industry lobby, which would surely happen if Dodd-Frank is opened back up – even for so-called technical fixes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">But just for the sake of argument, let’s assume that legislation is introduced and some co-sponsors are lined up.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Does that mean success is any more likely?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Probably not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To understand this assessment, we need to talk about the relative political power of interest groups in DC.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">While many of the larger lobbying organizations active in DC have the ability to block and/or shape legislation, there are far fewer who have enough political juice to get their own special interest legislation passed through Congress, no matter how limited. To be blunt, the captive insurance industry simply does not fit into this latter, more exclusive group.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Finally, the country’s biggest captive domiciles simply do not have powerful congressional delegations with regard to insurance-related issues, which could potentially offset the deficiencies and complications described above.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That is not to say these members of Congress would not be forceful advocates, they simply are not positioned to move legislation envisioned by proponents of this approach.</span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">So does all this mean that there will never be clarity relative to whether the NRRA applies to captives?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Well, it may not to come from Congress for the reasons we just explained, but it may come from federal regulators as part of the Dodd-Frank rule-making process.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">In fact, this avenue is now being actively explored by self-insurance industry lobbyists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This strategy can best be described as a “surgical strike,” as opposed to an expensive and pro-longed “land war,” which the congressional route would surely become.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">We’ll see if the political operatives now engaged with the regulators can hit the target.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But at least an arguably clearer path has been identified.<o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></b></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></b></div><br /><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></b></div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-50148015842127577952012-11-13T04:06:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:18:17.833-08:00Cash Loans Till Payday: Solution For Financial Clash<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW4_x5OsUZZSYWKJHQ8Uxty40yt07xXL-9oeqZOK8ofKZHe960FXDc_WL4KKXrpJgcpC3vyOuIL0-XYkalyf7FJ0rYHLqExQ-gucXHt4yzW0ESc8vrNu7DO4U9O6NNwCIfkYU_qJxUdCvW/s1600/asss.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW4_x5OsUZZSYWKJHQ8Uxty40yt07xXL-9oeqZOK8ofKZHe960FXDc_WL4KKXrpJgcpC3vyOuIL0-XYkalyf7FJ0rYHLqExQ-gucXHt4yzW0ESc8vrNu7DO4U9O6NNwCIfkYU_qJxUdCvW/s1600/asss.jpeg" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In today's uncertain economy, clash between unplanned expenses and limited funds has lifted the popularity of cash loans till payday. Cash till payday loans are small short term loans that fulfill the needs of borrower before his upcoming payday.<br /><br />Cash loans till payday are named so because cash loan acts as credit transaction that bridges the borrower’s unplanned expenses with the upcoming payday. Cash loans till payday are opted when borrowers finds his situation very repressive. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Cash loans overcome the expenses that have emerged in the mid of month and demands instant approach before upcoming payday. Therefore cash loan till payday helps the borrower when he is in need of urgent cash. <br /><br />Cash loans till payday are small, short term loans which are based on the borrower’s present financial condition or on their regular employment. Today, demand for cash loans till payday is increasing on day to day basis because of it various factors like:<br /><br />* no credit check<br /><br />* no collateral <br /><br />* offers easy payback facility <br /><br />* transaction through active bank account<br /><br />* fast cash approval<br /><br />* For everyone i.e. borrower with good or bad credit history<br /><br />Cash loans till payday, requires no collateral or credit check for a loan but for acquiring cash loans till payday borrower must be 18 years of age. Other than this borrower should be employed with minimum salary of £1200 moreover he must posses the active bank account. <br /><br />Getting a cash loan can be the life saver for your current situation but before opting cash loans, borrower must know that it carries higher interest rate. So, while opting for cash loan till payday borrower must be careful enough as it can lead you down the slippery slope of despair. <br /><br />Cash loans till payday can be even availed by the borrowers with the bad credit rating. Borrowers with bad credit are those who are suffering from defaults, arrears, CCJ’s, etc.<br /><br />Cash loans till payday are known by different names like cash loan, payday loan, advance loan and instant loan. </div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-38260018700391278372012-11-13T03:54:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:18:17.843-08:00Fast Cash Loans: Great Assistance In Need Of The Hour<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi78LhLd_6gr2J1L17PUn2bckwlbmsWe2xIWCy40EduNOT2jimCQuTBrRMJGXQQHRuplP6OVj8gO8ynuVR14N8xjSYkYtmOphAcUH89pP4mVB5xVqX67wN2ox9dORlpDMbnwZn5W7leuQqd/s1600/asss.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi78LhLd_6gr2J1L17PUn2bckwlbmsWe2xIWCy40EduNOT2jimCQuTBrRMJGXQQHRuplP6OVj8gO8ynuVR14N8xjSYkYtmOphAcUH89pP4mVB5xVqX67wN2ox9dORlpDMbnwZn5W7leuQqd/s1600/asss.jpeg" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For quicker deliverance of loan what can be the better source of money rather than fast cash loans? Moreover, its name also indicates its quick speed to reach in the hands of the applicant. In fact, anyone can become acquainted with all the profits of preferring these loans just after looking at the advantages that are being offered by it. These cash loans are mainly designed for people to meet their uncertain expenses anytime in the month without taking help from anyone else. The good part of the fast cash loans is that they come with no credit check facility and thus, they are accessible even by those who are facing bad credit scores.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The borrowers would be benefited by its quick cash delivery method, as their debt situation can be settled at the earliest. This is because, there would be no obstacle in the deliverance of the loan and anyone can have quick money to cater one’s needs. The endorsement and funds delivery methods are so quick, only for the reason that they are free from credit scrutiny and long formalities. It means that no applicant would be refused to access these loans, inclusive of individuals with poor or bad credit scores.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Usually, the presented loaned amount through fast cash loans varies from £100 to £1,500 and the reimbursement tenure ranges from 14 to 31 days. Since, the repayment process is easy, the borrowers can easily repay the money within a short time frame. In this way, it would be easier for you to hold the settlement stresses.<br /><br />The allocated sum through fast cash loans would be involuntarily shifted to the lender from your current account and you won’t need to bother about how to repay the money. Fast cash loans can be used for any purpose you want without any restrictions. You can use the fast cash loans for grocery bills, medical bills, school and tuition fees of your children, loan installments and a lot more other expenses. </div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8201945377300553366.post-22705628969982857112012-11-12T04:02:00.000-08:002014-01-19T04:18:17.852-08:00Loan Till Payday: Instant Cash Loans Till The Payday<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnpwVZuHy1kycDSdfQXfTi86hnCNp4rjoiGvYiy58mqrNEikyyufgvuEfeWRyK4zYjpSQKcqoWxtba4k79LL3gnG_Fpps8pkcesjwA7E6auPnnleAVFuijQOp4Z_g2pd7gW0iC7yD7aRpt/s1600/asss.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnpwVZuHy1kycDSdfQXfTi86hnCNp4rjoiGvYiy58mqrNEikyyufgvuEfeWRyK4zYjpSQKcqoWxtba4k79LL3gnG_Fpps8pkcesjwA7E6auPnnleAVFuijQOp4Z_g2pd7gW0iC7yD7aRpt/s1600/asss.jpeg" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Loan till payday is a short-term loan made against the following month’s salary or wages as collateral. This suits the borrower’s purpose as he is able to get assistance through cash advance payday loans quickly, as no time is wasted conducting credit checks. <br />These loans are available even to those people who do not have a good credit history. Borrowers with bad credit history like CCJ’s, IVA, payment defaults, arrears etc can apply for the cash till payday loans. These loans are the small short term unsecured loans which do not require any collateral. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It is easy to apply for loan till payday. Borrowers can easily avail loans by filling up an online application form. Being available online, the borrowers can apply at any time of the day. Cash loans till is usually given at high interest rates, yet with online search you can find the most nominal among the available deals by drawing comparisons. You can visit the websites of lenders and download free loan quotes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Borrowers can borrow an amount as much as £1200 within 24 hours of the application. <br />Delay in repayment of the loan amount can spoil your credit score. Therefore, repayment should be done in time without fail. It can be extended on genuine grounds. Cash till next payday loan takes care of all your unexpected, unplanned expenses like repairs, accident injury, bills etc and provide you with the instant cash as cash flow gap is very common these days among people. <br /><br />The other requirements of cash till payday loan include the borrower’s age which should be at least 18 and he should have a regular bank account as well as a regular job. </div>jazzyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05637364182913384477noreply@blogger.com0