• 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 / Bill Newton…Facts are Stubborn Things!

Bill Newton…Facts are Stubborn Things!

October 16, 2011 - Opinion by Scott Johnson Leave a Comment

In response to my last blog on actions Citizens board could take to curtail the influx of new policies, I received comments from the president of the Florida Consumer Action Network, Bill Newton.  Bill and I have had some productive exchanges in the past. I believe there’s mutual respect and we’ve even seen eye-to-eye on a few depopulation issues. However, even if his heart is in the right place, his facts and reasoning are not.

For those in the industry questioning why I even bother with this stuff, I can say only that Newton’s statement is, well…instructive–it reflects the thoughts of his members, if for no other reason than they believe what he tells them. He and others need to at least hear, occasionally, just how unfair the system they support is to the huge majority of consumers they claim to speak for.

First, let’s correct some of Bill Newton’s factual misstatements:

  • The proposal to limit Citizen’s to homes under $500k in replacement value did not pass and therefore, is not the law.  Since the limitation would have applied only to replacement cost of the dwelling, not the land, it only impacted around 5400 such homes anyway.
  • Cat Fund coverage is purchased by Citizens, too. As a matter of fact, Citizens consumes over 40% of the Cat Fund’s capacity and is by far and away the largest single purchaser.  Many carrier’s opposed the Cat Fund originally and are not in Florida today because they would be “forced” to purchase its coverage.
  • Rates charged by insurance companies cannot, according to regulations, include a profit factor of more than 3.7% of premium. Therefore, a lower premium due to purchasing Cat Fund coverage does not allow more profit (just the opposite).
  • Citizen’s is significantly cheaper than the private market. Using regulatory data, one can easily see how  grave the disparity between the rates of Citizens and those of private carriers actually is.  Check it out by clicking here. Other than wind-only policies, consumers choose Citizens for its lower rates, it’s promise of solvency, its sometimes superior coverage and because private carriers decline to write them at rates that are inadequate.
  • Private carrier profits are not up; insolvencies and underwriting losses are up! By saying profits are up Bill is parroting statements some politicians and consumer advocates have made based on countrywide figures for P&C insurer’s generally–such information is obviously irrelevant.

I hate talking about solvency and know many carrier’s wish I wouldn’t. I also doubt Bill Newton would accept anything I’d have to say anyway. But…Florida is experiencing record level insolvencies; more now than we had right after the 04/05 storms.  Underwriting losses are way up, too.  Weiss Ratings, the only agency that doesn’t accept payments from carriers, reported that 35 Florida insurers had a rating of either D or F; up from 29 just since December.  And, one of those, Argus F&C, has since been shut down.  In fact, the only state-owned carrier Weiss gave an A+ rating to was  Citizens, why… because it is the only one that can assess those it does not insure.  Bill Newton needs to simply check with the OIR to find out how wrong he is on this one.

Frankly, Newton’s factual and logical flaws are profound enough to wonder if the facts even matter or if ignoring them is intentional. I don’t want to be unfair, but…to say the Cat Fund is a subsidy for insurance companies is so “out there” one wonders if he, and others, simply want their subsidies to continue regardless of who, or how many it hurts.

A recent premium notice for my homeowners policy reflected a modest increase in rate, but…it showed assessments that were nearly double the rate increase. Rates per $1,000 of coverage in Citizens have decreased 32% since 2007.  Why am I, and millions like me, paying more so that those with coastal vacation homes can have rate decreases?

Inadequate rates at Citizens create numerous other problems, such as:

  1. People are encouraged to build homes on the coast or in sinkhole alley or to build unmitigated or poorly constructed homes. Such homes are unsafe and, in the long run, increase rates for everyone.
  2. Discriminatory assessments–poor people living in apartments or subsidized housing, who pay high auto rates because of inexperience, location, or youthful drivers subsidize rich people and non-residents with beachfront homes.
  3. It creates the potential for a financial disaster. Taxpayers have already contributed general revenue and assessments to Citizens for the storms of 2004 and 2005 somewhere around $2 Billion. They are on the hook for the next disaster as well.
  4. An insurance agent friend of mine was embarrassed to deliver a large commercial multi-peril policy to a local developer because it had assessments totaling nearly $60,000.  The developer responded that it wasn’t a problem because his commercial leases allowed him to add government surcharges and assessments to his rent.  In other words, small merchants, hair salons, boutiques and pizza parlors, will raise prices in order to pay the Citizens assessment on his commercial policy. And, their customers, homeowners and auto drivers, who have nobody to pass their assessments down to, will now pay twice. That’s the system Bill Newton is advocating!

A final note to Bill Newton…

…I respect you and we may never agree, but…by alleging there are complaints about Citizens exemption from bad faith you really showed your colors. Such complaints are from trial lawyers who want a guillotine over the head of Citizens like the one that allows them to extort settlements from private carriers.

You talked about carrier profits and I proved you wrong. Now I ask you to prove me wrong. Have you seen the profits lawyers make off of sinkhole claims? How can you say those profits, taken directly out of the consumers claim payment, are in the best interests of “consumers?”

##end##

 

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