Search CompleteMarkets

... Package Categories Popular Recent All Back Employment Practices Liability Insurance: Occurrence Forms versus Claims-Made Forms 10/20/2016 12:00:00 AM by CompleteMarkets Editor This content has not been rated yet. Before the advent of specialized Employment Practices Liability (EPL) insurance policies, many employers sought coverage under one or more of their standard Liability insurance policies. Because some of the early EPL claims were paid under these general policies, it's fair to say that the first EPL policies provided coverage on an occurrence basis. Squeamishness about how ... and the affirmative grant of coverage for intentional acts under most claims-made EPL policies represent important features that may be missing under occurrence-based EPL insurance. NOTES [1 ] Employees may make various claims-assault, battery, false imprisonment, slander, libel, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, conversion, and so on-in conjunction with complaints alleging discrimination, sexual harassment, or wrongful discharge. [2 ] Tail coverage is usually restricted to covered acts occurring during the policy period or retroactive period. There's usually no coverage for claims based on covered acts taking place ... the policy expires. The goal of the CompleteMarkets editor is to bring valuable content to the CompleteMarkets members. Providing content to insurance professionals to enhance their sales process, increase revenue streams, understand their clients and provide value to their agency. Login or Register (for FREE) to gain access to thousands of other great articles. Need more reasons to join? Need insurance for you, your business or your family? Get quality appointments - Save yourself a whole lot of time & money when you use our directory of carriers, ...

... Package Categories Popular Recent All Back Employment Practices Liability Insurance: Occurrence Forms versus Claims-Made Forms 10/20/2016 12:00:00 AM by CompleteMarkets Editor This content has not been rated yet. Before the advent of specialized Employment Practices Liability (EPL) insurance policies, many employers sought coverage under one or more of their standard Liability insurance policies. Because some of the early EPL claims were paid under these general policies, it's fair to say that the first EPL policies provided coverage on an occurrence basis. Squeamishness about how ... and the affirmative grant of coverage for intentional acts under most claims-made EPL policies represent important features that may be missing under occurrence-based EPL insurance. NOTES [1 ] Employees may make various claims-assault, battery, false imprisonment, slander, libel, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, conversion, and so on-in conjunction with complaints alleging discrimination, sexual harassment, or wrongful discharge. [2 ] Tail coverage is usually restricted to covered acts occurring during the policy period or retroactive period. There's usually no coverage for claims based on covered acts taking place ... the policy expires. The goal of the CompleteMarkets editor is to bring valuable content to the CompleteMarkets members. Providing content to insurance professionals to enhance their sales process, increase revenue streams, understand their clients and provide value to their agency. Login or Register (for FREE) to gain access to thousands of other great articles. Need more reasons to join? Need insurance for you, your business or your family? Get quality appointments - Save yourself a whole lot of time & money when you use our directory of carriers, ...

... Package Categories Popular Recent All Back Employment Practices Liability Insurance: Occurrence Forms versus Claims-Made Forms 10/20/2016 12:00:00 AM by CompleteMarkets Editor This content has not been rated yet. Before the advent of specialized Employment Practices Liability (EPL) insurance policies, many employers sought coverage under one or more of their standard Liability insurance policies. Because some of the early EPL claims were paid under these general policies, it's fair to say that the first EPL policies provided coverage on an occurrence basis. Squeamishness about how ... and the affirmative grant of coverage for intentional acts under most claims-made EPL policies represent important features that may be missing under occurrence-based EPL insurance. NOTES [1 ] Employees may make various claims-assault, battery, false imprisonment, slander, libel, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, conversion, and so on-in conjunction with complaints alleging discrimination, sexual harassment, or wrongful discharge. [2 ] Tail coverage is usually restricted to covered acts occurring during the policy period or retroactive period. There's usually no coverage for claims based on covered acts taking place ... the policy expires. The goal of the CompleteMarkets editor is to bring valuable content to the CompleteMarkets members. Providing content to insurance professionals to enhance their sales process, increase revenue streams, understand their clients and provide value to their agency. Login or Register (for FREE) to gain access to thousands of other great articles. Need more reasons to join? Need insurance for you, your business or your family? Get quality appointments - Save yourself a whole lot of time & money when you use our directory of carriers, ...

... tip sheets, sales letters, and more! Communications Marketing Customer Service Planning Finance/Accounting Risk Management Human Resources Selling Legal and E&O Technology Life/Financial Services Glossaries Management Resources & Links Categories Popular Recent All Back E&O : Failure To Read A Policy Is No Defense 4/30/2013 12:00:00 AM by Al Diamond , CompleteMarkets Editor This content has not been rated yet. Although the case cited in this article centers on a New Jersey ruling, it highlights the potential for exposure in ... states. Our subsequent conversation revealed a simple method of avoiding this E&O issue. See our remarks at the end of this article about how to protect yourself In a malpractice suit against an insurance broker by its customer, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided that insurance brokers may not rely on a customer's failure to read his insurance policy as the basis of a defense of comparative negligence. Aden v. Fortish, 169 N.J. 64 (2001) Before this decision, there have been numerous decisional pronouncements that an insured had ... two parties and determining proximate cause. In Aden v. Fortish, a fire damaged a condominium owned by the plaintiff and the condominium association's policy failed to cover the damage to the interior of the premises. Because the plaintiff's policy only provided $1 ,000 of coverage, plaintiffs were required to pay about $20,000 in repair costs. Plaintiffs sued the broker for allegedly neglecting to procure adequate coverage for the risk of loss. The broker filed an Answer contending that the plaintiffs failed to read their policy to determine if ...

...y if the insured dies with in the policy period. Most Term policies have conv...he sales process. Also, make it a policy to ask about Life insurance on the...

E&O: Failure To Read A Policy Is No Defense
Although the case ci... the agent would provide sufficient coverage to protect the insured’s property...

...ew at the end of binder period if policy is not received. b. Mail or give the...ing for granted. Give any coverage information in connection with a ...

...ugh they analyze risks and review policy forms to give their prospects and cli...rsations and written records of all coverage-sensitive issues, but at some poi...

... client from another state whose tow truck rear-ended a car, causing an occupant of the vehicle to become a wheelchair-bound paraplegic. The underlying case was worth $5 million to $10 million. The client, a new customer, had provided a copy of his previous policy to the agent and asked for coverage. The agent stated that he saw the previous policy had $1 million primary and $4 million umbrella. According to the agent, he told the client he was only going to obtain a primary policy for $1 ... . Again, according to the agent, the client never got back to him on the umbrella. The client testified that he told the agent to duplicate his prior policy, and assumed that he had umbrella coverage. Unfortunately, there was no documentation of the alleged conversations between the agent and the client. The E&O carrier settled the claim for the limit of the agency's policy, $1 million. Could this happen in your agency? There's probably not much question whether clients need or want primary coverages. After all ... the vast majority of your commercial clients need liability and auto, etc. When you meet with them, there's little doubt that you are to put these vital coverages into effect. However, when the topic gets around to an umbrella, the answer might not be so easy for your client to answer because it involves additional expense they might not be able to afford. As they debate this in their mind, they'll probably try to determine the likelihood that the "big claim" could happen to them. In the claim, ...

Insurance Policy Management System: How AI Enables Per...dence. An intelligent insurance policy management platform represents the...