Quote:
Originally Posted by FRPLG
I think it is important to understand what you are getting from an insurance company.
You are NOT getting a service by which they will pony up for the items covered in your policy. This is a direct action CAUSED by their service. What you are really buying is their backup. IE: you are paying for them to sit there and be ready and able to pay for your covered expenses. If you never make a claim you still received their service because their service wasn't the paying of claims it was the readiness and ability to do so.
To say people have paid for years and then wrongly lost their policies is to infer that the insurance company owes them because of all the money they paid without getting a service, when in reality they already received the service they were supposed to receive.
Otherwise it seems you want insurance to be more like an investment where people pay in and if they don't make a claim then the insurance company stills owes you a service since you have been banking premiums for years.
That's not what insurance is. It is a subtle but very important distinction.
|
While the legality has never been an issue. Their legal ability to exit the state is not an issue. My ability to understand.............their desire to bail out of the state, subtle or not is not the issue. The insurance companies were VERY eager to collect the premiums, and associated profits when it was EASY. When the going got tuff....they were just as eager to bail. There is no misunderstanding regarding what services are offered, and recieved (actually used or not).