Elmquist & Zitzloff Insurance Agency Blog

View the latest blog posts from Elmquist & Zitzloff Insurance Agency!

customerGUIDblogGUIDblogTitleblogEntryblogTimestampblogIPblogWebSafeTitle
First Page Previous Page
123
Next Page Last Page
Page size:
select

Internet Crime Complaint Center Reaches 2 Million Entries


Internet Crime Complaint Center Reaches 2 Million Entries
Source: FBI



16 Nov 2010

A milestone entry in cyber crime was reached on November 9, 2010, when the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) logged its 2 millionth consumer complaint alleging online criminal activity.

The IC3, a partnership between the FBI and the National White Collar Crime Center, became operational in May 2000 and received its 1 millionth complaint seven years later, on June 11, 2007. It took half that time to receive the 2 millionth complaint, which illustrates the IC3’s increased visibility and the continued growth of cyber crime.

The IC3 receives, develops, and refers cyber crime complaints to local, state, federal, and international law enforcement agencies. The IC3 gives cyber crime victims a convenient and easy-to-use reporting mechanism that alerts authorities of suspected criminal or civil violations.

Since its inception, the IC3 has referred 757,016 criminal complaints to law enforcement around the globe. The majority of referrals involved fraud in which the complainant incurred a financial loss. The total reported loss from these referrals is approximately $1.7 billion, with a median reported loss of more than $500 per complaint.*

Many complaints involved identity theft, such as loss of personally identifying data, and the unauthorized use of credit cards or bank accounts. The IC3 uses information from the complaints to detect emerging trends and proactively fight consumer victimization through educational efforts with project partners, various publications and the consumer education website, www.lookstoogoodtobetrue.com.





| |
Posted Wednesday, November 17 2010 11:54 AM
View / Post Comments


Study Shows Dog Bite Claims Topped $400 Million in 2009; Payouts Have Grown 30% in Six Years


Study Shows Dog Bite Claims Topped $400 Million in 2009; Payouts Have Grown 30% in Six Years

Source: Insurance Information Institute

20 Aug 2010

Dog bites accounted for more than one-third of all homeowners insurance liability claims paid out in 2009, costing $412 million and up 6.4 percent from 2008, according to the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.).

An analysis of homeowners insurance data by the I.I.I. found that the average cost of dog bite claims was $24,840 in 2009, up slightly from $24,461 in 2008. In fact, over the six-year period since 2003, the cost of these claims has risen nearly 30 percent. Additionally, the number of claims increased by 4.8 percent to 16,586 in 2009 from 15,823 in 2008.

"The rise in dog bite claims over the last seven years (2003-2009) can be attributed to increased medical costs as well as the size of settlements, judgments and jury awards given to plaintiffs, which have risen well above the rate of inflation in recent years," said Loretta Worters, vice president at the I.I.I.

More than 4.7 million people in the United States are bitten by dogs annually, and nearly 900,000 of those, half of them children, require medical care, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).Of those injured, 386,000 require treatment in an emergency department and about 16 die. The rate of dog bite related injuries is highest for children aged five to nine years old; the rate decreases thereafter. Almost two-thirds of these injuries among children ages four years and younger are to the head or neck region. Injury rates in children are significantly higher for boys than for girls.With more than 50 percent of bites occurring on the dog owner’s property, the issue is a major source of concern for insurers.

There are three kinds of law that impose liability on owners:

- Dog-bite statute: The dog owner is automatically liable for any injury or property damage the dog causes, even without provocation.

- “One-bite” rule: In some states, the owner is not held liable for the first bite the dog inflicts. Once an animal has demonstrated vicious behavior, such as biting or otherwise displaying a ‘vicious propensity’, the owner can be held liable. Some states have moved away from the one-bite rule and hold owners responsible for any injury, regardless of whether the animal has previously bitten someone.

- Negligence laws: The dog owner is liable if the injury occurred because he or she was unreasonably careless (negligent) in controlling the dog.

In most states, dog owners are not liable for losses incurred by trespassers who are injured by a dog. A dog owner who is legally responsible for an injury to a person or property may be responsible for reimbursing the injured person for medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering and property damage.

“Some people purchase dogs for the purpose of guarding their homes; however, deadbolt locks and home security systems are safe burglary deterrents, which will often earn you a discount on your insurance premium,” said Worters.

Homeowners and renters insurance policies typically cover dog bite liability. Most standard homeowners policies provide policyholders with anywhere from $100,000 to $300,000 in liability coverage. If the claim exceeds those limits, the dog owner is personally responsible for all damages above that amount, including legal expenses. A liability policy also provides no-fault medical coverage in the event a dog bites a friend or neighbor. This enables them to submit their medical bills directly to the homeowner’s insurance company. Homeowners can generally get $1,000 to $5,000 worth of this coverage.

Most insurance companies will insure homeowners with dogs. However, once a dog has bitten someone, the insurance company may charge a higher premium or exclude the dog from coverage. Some companies require dog owners to sign liability waivers for dog bites. Some will cover a pet only if the owner takes the dog to classes aimed at modifying its behavior.

A single lawsuit—even if won by the dog owner who has been sued—can end up costing hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and lost wages. The greater a person’s assets, the more potential there is for risk. The personal liability coverage available through a standard homeowners or automobile policy simply may not be enough. Therefore, the I.I.I. advises homeowners to consider purchasing a personal excess liability policy, which protects against personal liabilities, such as dog bites, that could impact a substantial portion of assets.

Umbrella liability coverage usually ranges from $1 million to $10 million, and covers broad types of liability. Most insurance companies have required minimum amounts of underlying coverage—typically at least $250,000 of protection from an auto policy and $300,000 of protection from a homeowners policy. If you own a boat, you must also have boat insurance with a specified minimum amount of coverage.



| |
Posted Friday, August 20 2010 11:48 AM
View / Post Comments


A Rash of Bedbug Infestations May Take a Bite Out of Insurers


A Rash of Bedbug Infestations May Take a Bite Out of Insurers

Source: Business Insurance

The pesky critters have been around for centuries and were the bane of American society in the 1700s. Their popularity may have waned since then, but bedbugs are back with a vengeance, prompting insurance for business interruption, third-party liability claims, and reputation risks as hotels and even retail stores face infestations of the bloodsucking pests.

New York has the dubious distinction of being a focal point for bedbug problems, with a recent survey revealing that one of every 15 New Yorkers has dealt with an infestation. Throughout the Big Apple, bedbugs have been found in locations ranging from hotels and theaters to high-end retail stores and the public library.

They are becoming a more widespread concern as the number of infestations increases, said Mac D. Nadel, Norwalk, Conn.-based U.S. practice leader for Marsh Inc.'s retail and wholesale food and beverage practice group. The latest reports have put some focus on retailers, which shows it's not only just a hospitality business problem, but a property, real estate and general problem.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration reportedly fielded 11,000 complaints about the pests in 2009 compared with just 537 in 2004. As a result, $500,000 has been committed to deal with the infestation.

However, reports have sprung up in Ohio and Los Angeles as well. Bedbugs-which are not known to spread disease but bite and leave itchy red welts-are more of a nuisance than anything else, but the problem they create is being taken seriously.

More importantly, it's no longer just a hospitality industry problem and the battle against bedbugs is expected to continue.

You really have to take the blinders off on this issue because they're starting to get into places that are not normally exposed to bedbugs, said Tracy Knippenburg Gillis, New York-based crisis management practice leader for Marsh Risk Consulting. It makes it more important for retailers, hotels and other commercial businesses to have a process in place to mitigate the spread and to prevent further occurrences.

Most standard commercial property policies either have specific vermin exclusions for infestation or loss due to insects or have other broad contamination exclusions, insurance brokers and insurers said, adding that the policyholder has to prove actual damage of items that were infested if exclusions aren't present in the policy.

David Kroeger, Chicago-based attorney within Jenner & Block L.L.P.'s insurance and reinsurance group, said policyholders should look closely at what the vermin exclusion says and how it categorizes and defines vermin.

I wouldn't give up on the property policy immediately, Kroeger said. Vermin exclusions may not focus on bedbugs, but may focus on insects like termites.

This is important, Kroeger said, because if a store or hotel is forced to shut down due to bedbug infestation and cannot reopen until after fumigation, business interruption coverage could be triggered.

For hotels, loss-of-attraction coverage could be applied for actual losses sustained due to cancellations or the inability to accept bookings for rooms due to murder and suicide, and also may apply to vermin, said Nancy Green, Chicago-based executive vp at Aon Risk Solutions, a division of Aon Corp.

She also said that type of coverage is an extension of a typical property policy and can provide some relief, typically up to $1 million or higher, depending on the limits purchased.



| |
Posted Wednesday, August 18 2010 12:20 PM
View / Post Comments


Vacant Homes Pose Insurance Risks


Source: National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC)

10 Aug 2010

As the U.S. housing market struggles to rebound, many homeowners are stuck with hard-to-sell properties longer than expected. Some frustrated home sellers who must relocate for a new job opportunity, want to downsize or simply want to buy a new place have left homes empty. Vacant or unoccupied homes can leave the homeowner exposed to loss and liability that may not be covered by their insurance, according to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC).

The Pending Home Sales Index, released yesterday by the National Association of Realtors, dropped 2.6 percent to 75.7 based on contracts signed in June from 77.7 in May, and is 18.6 percent below June 2009 – another sign of the stagnant housing market.

“In many cases, people who have been trying to sell their homes for awhile have moved forward with their plans regardless, leaving a vacant home on the market,” said NAIC President and West Virginia Insurance Commissioner Jane L. Cline. “Having an unoccupied home can create several insurance implications that typically are not covered under a standard homeowners policy.”

The Added Risks of Vacant Homes

Homeowners policies are meant to insure homes that are occupied, so they generally include exclusions for neglect or property abandonment on a home left vacant or unoccupied for a specified number of consecutive days.

In insurance terms, a vacant home is one the resident has moved out of and taken his/her belongings with him/her. An unoccupied home is one where the resident is not staying at the home, but the furniture and other belongings remain.

Because vacant and unoccupied homes pose a higher risk for damage than occupied homes, insurance companies insure these properties differently and usually at a higher price. These risks include:

• Break-ins: When a home has been unoccupied for awhile, it can show signs that nobody is around – unkempt lawn, full mailbox, no lights on – that can tip off burglars to an easy target.

• No emergency response: Without anyone home to call 911 or respond to emergencies, a manageable problem – such as a small electrical fire – can turn into a much larger, more costly disaster.

• Property liability: There is no one present to prevent others from entering the property or to supervise activity, which could increase the likeliness of an accident on the premises or property damage when the owner is not there.

Keeping Vacant Homes Properly Insured

The definition of vacancy and unoccupancy can vary from policy to policy. Some insurers may not pay claims if a home is vacant for 60 days or more. Some policies might automatically shift to a different amount of coverage (e.g. liability insurance only) after a specific number of days unoccupied.

Many homeowners policies have a “vacancy clause” that can be triggered if the homeowner is gone for an extended period of time. If this happens, the homeowner could violate the terms of their contract and some or all of their coverage may not apply in the event of a loss.

Many insurance companies offer an endorsement that will provide coverage for a dwelling that is unoccupied for an extended period of time. Vacancy policies can also be purchased for different term lengths to cover a few months to a year, depending on the need.

The cost of vacancy coverage depends on the company and state in which the property is located, but costs usually are higher than a typical homeowners policy due to the overall increase in risk.



| |
Posted Tuesday, August 10 2010 1:27 PM
View / Post Comments


Driver Distractions Include Texting, Eating, Grooming and More


Source: Insurance Information Institute

Driver distractions or inattentive driving play a part in one out of every four motor vehicle crashes. That is more than 1.5 million collisions a year and 4,300 crashes daily, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Text messaging, changing radio stations, even turning around to talk to passengers can prove deadly, according to the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.).

While cellphones and text messaging cause the most accidents, drivers are also distracted by using PDAs, laptops and navigational aids while driving. Other drivers create a potential hazard because they eat, drink, read, write or groom themselves when their full attention should be on the road in front of them.

“A car is not your living room, office or kitchen. It is a means of getting from one point to another and must be used judiciously,” said Loretta Worters, vice president with the I.I.I. “People can become so absorbed in their conversations or activities that their ability to concentrate on the crucial act of driving is severely impaired, jeopardizing the safety of vehicle occupants and pedestrians.”

In January 2010, the National Safety Council (NSC) released a report estimating that at least 1.6 million crashes (28 percent of all crashes) are caused each year in the U.S. by drivers talking on cellphones (1.4 million crashes) and texting (200,000 crashes). The estimate is based on data of driver cellphone use from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and research that quantifies the risks using cellphones and texting while driving.

A July 2009 Virginia Tech Transportation Institute study found that texting while driving is far more dangerous than previously estimated. The collision risk became 23 times higher when motorists were texting while driving.

On July 21, Kentucky's new ban-on-texting-while-driving law goes into effect making it the 30th state, (including the District of Columbia and Guam), to ban texting while driving. Eleven such laws were enacted in 2010 to help stem the growing problem.

The Utah texting while driving law ban, passed in May 2009, is the toughest in the nation. Offenders convicted of causing an accident that injures or kills someone while texting behind the wheel face up to 15 years in prison. The law does not consider a crash caused by a multitasking driver as an accident, but rather as an inherently reckless act, like drunk driving.

In addition, as of June 2010 eight states (California, Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Utah and Washington State) plus the District of Columbia, ban the use of hand-held cellphones while driving.

Employers May Be Held Liable

Employers are now concerned that they may be held liable for accidents caused by their employees while driving and conducting work-related conversations on cellphones, according to the I.I.I. Under the doctrine of vicarious responsibility, employers may be held legally accountable for the negligent acts of employees committed in the course of employment. Employers may also be found negligent if they fail to put in place a policy for the safe use of cellphones.

“In response, many companies have established cellphone usage policies,” said Worters. “Some allow employees to conduct business over the phone as long as they pull over to the side of the road or into a parking lot. Others have completely banned the use of all wireless devices in the car.”



| |
Posted Monday, August 02 2010 2:55 PM
View / Post Comments