• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Johnson Strategies LLC - Test

Planning, Communications, Advocacy

  • Home
  • The JS Story
  • About JS
    • Mission
    • About Scott
    • Writing
  • Videos
  • Library
    • AOB prior to reforms effective July 1, 2019
    • AOB on and after reforms effective July 1, 2019
    • Citizens
    • Legislative Glossary
    • Government Studies and Reports
    • Miscellaneous Documents
    • Presentations and Powerpoints
  • Links
    • Government
    • Other Helpful Sites
  • Contact
You are here: Home / Citizens / Assessments–Citizens vs. FIGA

Assessments–Citizens vs. FIGA

May 29, 2013 - Opinion by Scott Johnson Leave a Comment

Recently, after reading yet another editorial implying that FIGA (Florida Insurance Guaranty Association) assessments are similar to deficit assessments levied by Citizens, I found myself in a conversation with an industry associate who seemed to accept this dislogic and the resulting conclusions spread by the likes of the Sarasota Herald Tribune, the Palm Beach Post and perhaps a few other media outlets and consumer groups.    

You may recall the fur flying after a 2012 report from the Insurance Consumer Advocate’s (ICA) office showing potential assessments from various storm scenarios.  The report titled “Potential Assessments from Florida Hurricanes” quickly got taken out of context by the media, demagogued by the usual political suspects and used as proof positive that Citizens was in better shape than private carriers.    

The study, then and now, is buttressing arguments that private carriers are “weak”–to use the words of an article and an editorial in the Herald Tribune. When, in fact, the report warned up-front (p.4) that there were “Limitations” with the analysis and that it “…may not be applicable for other purposes.”  It’s author, actuary Steve Alexander, even cautioned that he should be consulted for “explanations”.

Perhaps the most perverse misrepresentation was that Citizens rates do not need to rise, but…private carriers needed to operate more efficiently, like Citizens. Whatever!

Anyway, in June of last year, Robin Westcott yanked the study from the web. Detailed op-eds rebutting the media’s flaky math were drafted–a few even making it into print, but…the damage was done!

While the media facts and figures were rebutted no one, it seemed to me, pointed out why assessments in Citizens are not even in the same ballpark as those levied by FIGA.  It’s time that such be done.

First, to fully understand delineations between Citizen’s and FIGA assessments one must first consider the difference between “failure” and “success”.  When Citizens levies an assessment, like those still appearing on the policies of millions of Floridians and businesses across the state, it represents success–it is the successful implementation of a legislative mandate to suppress premiums–it’s the way the mechanism is designed to work up front, before any losses occur. 

Not so with FIGA. When it levies an assessment it represents the failure of the system.  It’s not the way things are supposed to work–it’s what occurs at the back end because something went terribly wrong at the front end or along the way.  It reflects the public policy that policyholders deserve protection from the failure of the regulator and the legislature to prevent insolvencies. After all, “solvency” is just code for “actuarially sound rates.”  Citizens rates are intentionally not actuarially sound and the shortfall is made up by allowing the confiscation (assessment) of money from those it doesn’t even insure. 

Big difference, don’t you think?

Second, a Citizens assessment is levied as a result of trying to help someone, more often than not a wealthy coastal homeowner, pay less premium than they should.    

A FIGA assessment, on the other hand, is primarily levied to cover an unreimbursed loss.  A home has been damaged or destroyed. The homeowner paid the state approved premium to a state approved, allegedly solvent, company, but…the state miscalculated and the result is an otherwise covered loss is not being paid.  (See NOTE #1 below).

This last distinction makes all the difference in my book and goes to the heart of what’s wrong with assessments levied to subsidize residual market premiums. You can pay less with Citizens and get a guarantee of payment.  But, if you go to the private market, you’ll likely pay more and have the potential of an unpaid  loss accompanied with legal hassles, delays and an additional deductible. By the way, after a deficit rendering storm, private market claimants of insolvent carriers are, inexplicably, still assessed to cover the lower premiums paid by Citizens policyholders.    

Keep in mind that, in addition to FIGA losses being capped, its assessments are levied only against those policyholders purchasing similar coverage. In other words, an auto policyholder who cannot afford a home does not get assessed to pay for unpaid losses of a private residential insurer.  They do get assessed to pay for Citizens losses, however.  In fact, everyone gets assessed to pay for Citizens reduced premiums except rich doctors and employers on their workers compensation premiums.  (See NOTE#2 below)

##end##

NOTE #1–In fairness, the OIR often blames insolvency on the mismanagement or even fraudulent activity by the carrier; or, that it failed to follow guidelines in the consent decree granting  the Certificate of Authority.  None the less, the system failed and policyholders have “unreimbursed” losses; which is the foundation for FIGA assessments.  Other amounts owed by the defunct carrier can also be funded by FIGA assessments, such as premium or commissions owed. For more see: 2012 Estimated FIGA Assessment Impact; Domestic Carriers.  See also, State of Florida’s Homeowners Insurance Market–a presentation by Kevin McCarty, 6/12/12. http://johnsonstrategiesllc.com/wp-content/plugins/download-monitor/download.php?id=245

NOTE #2–So, why does the Citizens assessment calculation exclude Medical Malpractice and Workers Compensation premiums?  Frankly, it’s because their lobbyists did a better job–I can think of no other logical reason to assess large commercial liability premiums and small auto or personal umbrella policies but not assess workers compensation or medical malpractice.  A good question is, if we did include these two lines in the Citizens assessment base, could we eliminate assessments on the automobiles of poor people who can’t even afford to own property? For more see  http://www.figafacts.com/home

IMPORTANT:  If you enjoyed this post you’re invited to subscribe for automatic notifications by going to: www.scottjohnsonflorida.com.  Enter your email address where indicated.  If you’re already on the website at Johnson Strategies, LLC:  go to the home page and enter your email address on the right hand side.  Remember, you’ll receive an email confirming your acceptance, so…check and clear your spam filter for notifications from Johnson Strategies, LLC.  ENJOY!

Share this articleEmail this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInTweet about this on Twitter

Filed Under: Citizens, General Property Issues

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Primary Sidebar

Unless otherwise attributed, articles on this site are the opinions of Scott Johnson.



Order Scott’s Books

What's Past is Prologue

Lessons from the Worst Insurance Crisis in Florida’s History... ASSIGNMENT OF BENEFITS

Fact & Fallacy

Essays & Opinions on Florida's Most Controversial Insurance Topics.

Platforms of Success

What the New Generation of Elite Sellers are Doing and How it Can Work for You!
Learn More at www.Platformsofsuccess.com

From Cartels to Competition

The Evolution of Insurance and the History of Florida's Independent Insurance Agent.
Learn More at www.faia.com

Recent blog posts

  • Collapse of an Evil Empire! PART VII—Market Impact
  • Collapse of an Evil Empire! PART VI—The Sentence
  • Collapse of an Evil Empire! PART V–Guilty as Charged!
  • Point of Personal Privilege–Jeff Grady’s Retirement
  • Collapse of an Evil Empire! PART IV ½–Update

Blog Archive

  • October 2020 (3)
  • September 2020 (2)
  • August 2020 (2)
  • July 2020 (1)
  • June 2020 (2)
  • April 2020 (1)
  • March 2020 (1)
  • February 2020 (1)
  • January 2020 (1)
  • August 2019 (2)
  • June 2019 (1)
  • March 2019 (1)
  • January 2019 (1)
  • December 2018 (1)
  • November 2018 (1)
  • September 2018 (1)
  • July 2018 (1)
  • June 2018 (2)
  • October 2017 (2)
  • September 2017 (1)
  • August 2017 (1)
  • June 2017 (1)
  • April 2017 (2)
  • March 2017 (2)
  • February 2017 (1)
  • December 2016 (1)
  • October 2016 (1)
  • August 2016 (2)
  • July 2016 (1)
  • June 2016 (1)
  • March 2016 (2)
  • February 2016 (1)
  • January 2016 (2)
  • November 2015 (1)
  • October 2015 (1)
  • September 2015 (1)
  • August 2015 (2)
  • July 2015 (2)
  • June 2015 (2)
  • May 2015 (1)
  • April 2015 (2)
  • March 2015 (1)
  • February 2015 (3)
  • January 2015 (1)
  • December 2014 (2)
  • November 2014 (4)
  • October 2014 (1)
  • September 2014 (2)
  • August 2014 (2)
  • July 2014 (2)
  • June 2014 (2)
  • May 2014 (3)
  • April 2014 (2)
  • March 2014 (3)
  • February 2014 (3)
  • January 2014 (2)
  • December 2013 (2)
  • November 2013 (2)
  • October 2013 (2)
  • September 2013 (2)
  • August 2013 (2)
  • July 2013 (3)
  • June 2013 (2)
  • May 2013 (3)
  • April 2013 (2)
  • March 2013 (3)
  • February 2013 (5)
  • January 2013 (2)
  • December 2012 (4)
  • November 2012 (3)
  • October 2012 (4)
  • August 2012 (5)
  • July 2012 (5)
  • June 2012 (4)
  • May 2012 (3)
  • April 2012 (7)
  • March 2012 (3)
  • February 2012 (3)
  • January 2012 (5)
  • December 2011 (6)
  • November 2011 (7)
  • October 2011 (6)
  • September 2011 (2)
  • August 2011 (7)
  • July 2011 (7)
  • June 2011 (4)
  • May 2011 (4)

Newsletter

Tag Cloud

7-7-7 Plan Citizens Insurance oir Rick Scott sb-480 senator fasano senator richter

Copyright 2012, Johnson Strategies LLC. Website design/development by Cali Design LLC