Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
To understand why the insurance industry is spiraling in California, consider Proposition 103. Passed by voters in 1988, the law was meant to protect consumers by preventing insurers from ...
Delay, Deny, Defend is a critical exploration of the property and casualty insurance industry, examining how its practices affect policyholders.Feinman, a law professor specializing in consumer rights and insurance law, argues that the industry prioritizes profits over policyholders' needs, often using tactics like delaying or denying legitimate claims to bolster financial performance.
Between 2020 and 2022, insurance companies declined to renew 2.8 million homeowner policies in the state, according to the most recent data from the California Department of Insurance.
And most people don’t push back — a study found that only 0.1% of denied claims under the Affordable Care Act, a law designed to make health insurance more affordable and prevent coverage ...
Insurance bad faith is a tort [1] unique to the law of the United States (but with parallels elsewhere, particularly Canada) that an insurance company commits by violating the "implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing" which automatically exists by operation of law in every insurance contract.
Proposition 103, titled Insurance Rate Reduction and Reform Act, was a California ballot proposition voted on in the 1988 California General Election. It passed with 51% of the vote on November 8, 1988. [1] Proposition 103 expanded the regulatory capacities of the California Department of Insurance, especially in property and casualty insurance.
The state Department of Insurance issued a new regulation last month meant to turn the tide of some of the largest insurance companies' refusal to take on new customers in California or decisions ...
In July 1998, an anonymous French whistle-blower told the California Insurance Department that Crédit Lyonnais was the real buyer of the insurance company and controlled it through secret agreements. In early 1999, the California Insurance Department sued the bank and other parties, alleging fraud and seeking $2 billion in restitution. [4]