rtf's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/163256/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/164579/comments?source=feed#comment-702340 702340
Now you tell me, should insureds be allowed to under pay for their Long Term Care insurance for how many years, and then the PA DOI throw their hands up and say "well it seems we have a problem that the rate increases we now need seem too high. Let's just liquidate the company and distribute the 1.2 billion in claim reserves to the state guarantee funds and make it their probem."

To me that looks like gross mis-conduct on the PA DOI's part for not regulating the rates better to begin with and more importantly for not going to the other Department's of Ins. now and demanding rate action to protect policyholder benefits. The PA DOI is harming the Policyholder and agent in the failure to act.

Policyholders will end up in the state guarantee funds which in some cases will cap their benefits at 100k. While they may be forced to give up substanially better coverage. Many of whom have poor health and will be unable to re-qaulify elsewhere. They would gladly pay the additional premium if given a chance, but the PA DOI has not done so with the other states. And if they have and have been rejected then it raises a serious question as to wether the other state DOI's believe that the surplus hole exisit at all?

The agents loose as well since their vested compensation is wiped out as a result of moving the policyholder to the guarantee fund.

Finally it places the risk on the individuals of the states who had no proir risk, not the policyholders who purchased. Let's just charge the correct premium. They should be fine that. If they don't want to kepp their policy after the rate increase then fine. These plans do not come with a rate guarantee.]]> Sun, 04 Oct 2009 10:24:53 -0400
Now you tell me, should insureds be allowed to under pay for their Long Term Care insurance for how many years, and then the PA DOI throw their hands up and say "well it seems we have a problem that the rate increases we now need seem too high. Let's just liquidate the company and distribute the 1.2 billion in claim reserves to the state guarantee funds and make it their probem."

To me that looks like gross mis-conduct on the PA DOI's part for not regulating the rates better to begin with and more importantly for not going to the other Department's of Ins. now and demanding rate action to protect policyholder benefits. The PA DOI is harming the Policyholder and agent in the failure to act.

Policyholders will end up in the state guarantee funds which in some cases will cap their benefits at 100k. While they may be forced to give up substanially better coverage. Many of whom have poor health and will be unable to re-qaulify elsewhere. They would gladly pay the additional premium if given a chance, but the PA DOI has not done so with the other states. And if they have and have been rejected then it raises a serious question as to wether the other state DOI's believe that the surplus hole exisit at all?

The agents loose as well since their vested compensation is wiped out as a result of moving the policyholder to the guarantee fund.

Finally it places the risk on the individuals of the states who had no proir risk, not the policyholders who purchased. Let's just charge the correct premium. They should be fine that. If they don't want to kepp their policy after the rate increase then fine. These plans do not come with a rate guarantee.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/72428/comments?source=feed#comment-151406 151406 Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:42:02 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/67854/comments?source=feed#comment-125785 125785
biz.yahoo.com/ibd/0803...

Thoughts?]]> Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:43:22 -0400
biz.yahoo.com/ibd/0803...

Thoughts?]]>