California was one of only six states out of the 50 states and the District of Columbia that received an excellent rating.

“Consumers need information so they can make an informed choice on insurance and I’m proud that California is at the forefront of using the Web to provide that information,” said Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner. “As we implement our paperless initiative, in addition to the obvious environmental benefits, we will also be able to put even more data online so people can see for themselves information that’s only available in our reading rooms.”

The Department’s Telecommunications Infrastructure Replacement Project was completed in 2008 and involved the replacement of a nearly 20-year old system with a voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) infrastructure. Included in the replacement was the successful installation of 1,500 handsets, 150 softphones, and several call center applications. This transition has enabled the Department to better serve California consumers, in addition to saving $80,000 per year in long distance charges and communication lines.

For more information on the study, please visit http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/state_insurance_websites.pdf.

Source: DOI

In February 2008, prior to the law’s enforcement, the majority of Washington drivers thought the law did not go far enough, allowing police to ticket hand-held cell-phone users only if they are stopped for another, more-serious offense, known as a primary offense. Now, however, law enforcement classify the violation as a secondary offense.

In the most recent poll, results show the number of primary-offense supporters has slipped and now only half of respondents think the law should be more severe.

“Washington drivers recognize that cell phones are a distraction, and our poll results show that most still agree that cell use should be regulated to keep our roads safe,” said Pemco spokesman Jon Osterberg. “The percentage of drivers who support the law as a primary offense has slipped, so we’ll continue to track how the law is perceived.”

Pemco has been tracking awareness and attitudes toward cell phone legislation since February 2004. In February 2008, before the law went into effect, 60 percent of respondents said that talking without a hands-free device while driving should be treated as a primary offense. Now, just three months after using a hand-held device while driving became illegal, fewer drivers — 50 percent — support the violation as a primary offense.

The most recent poll shows that awareness about the law and how it is classified has increased significantly. When polled in February 2008, just 38 percent of respondents understood the law was a secondary offense. Now, seven out of 10 are aware they can’t be pulled over merely for talking on a cell phone. Additionally, 97 percent of those polled were aware that hand-held usage while driving is illegal.

Despite the waning support of more-stringent enforcement of the law, the poll indicated drivers are adjusting their behavior in compliance with the law. One-in-three Washington drivers now report using a hands-free device more often in response to the law, and the same percentage say they talk on cell phones less while driving.

Perhaps not surprising, younger drivers are significantly more likely than their older counterparts to prefer that the law remains a secondary offense. For their part, younger drivers are also more likely to admit that they talk on the phone only if they don’t see a law enforcement person nearby (19 percent versus 4 percent).

For more information on the poll, visit http://survey.pemco.com/.

Source: Pemco

The survey, sponsored by the Chubb Group of Insurance Cos, found that 41 percent of respondents said they are very concerned about crime against themselves and their families based on the economy. Forty percent are very concerned about the trustworthiness of household contractors, and 34 percent are very concerned about checking the backgrounds of longtime household help, including babysitters, nannies and cleaning staff. Although 25 percent are very concerned about taking additional security precautions at home, only 8 percent plan to spend more money on these needs and 39 percent anticipate spending less.

“It is understandable that people are worried that crime will increase in these difficult times,” said Scott Spencer, senior vice president, Chubb & Son, and worldwide appraisal and loss prevention manager for Chubb Personal Insurance. “But it is more important than ever for families to allocate more, not fewer, resources toward their protection.”

Spencer encouraged homeowners to perform thorough background checks including credit and criminal histories on all household employees. Even if they were conducted in prior years, he suggested that the backgrounds be reexamined as emerging financial pressures may tempt some employees to steal. Also, homeowners should verify that home maintenance and repair contractors have rechecked the backgrounds of their employees.

The survey also found that 45 percent of respondents plan to spend less on home improvements such as renovations or additions and 25 percent plan to cut spending on maintenance and repairs.

“Spending less on home maintenance and repairs often is not cost-effective in either the short- or long-term,” said Spencer. “A few dollars spent now on maintenance and repairs can save you thousands of dollars on energy bills and prevent more costly repairs later.”

The 2008 Chubb National Home Protection Survey was conducted in early November by Opinion Research Corporation, a worldwide research and consulting firm in Princeton, N.J.

Source: Chubb, www.chubb.com

Through the course of its investigation, CDI investigators discovered that between March 2004 and January 2006, Franklin allegedly collected and/or overcharged five victims of at least $10,129, which was supposed to pay automobile insurance policy premiums. The CDI investigation determined that Mr. Franklin, whose insurance license was revoked in 2004 following his conviction of grand theft of insurance premium, allegedly quoted excessive monthly payments to the victims for their policies. Mrs. Franklin then allegedly placed coverage for the victims, and arranged to collect their monthly payments using a payment collection company, which deposited the payment into the Franklins’ bank account. Three of the victims’ policies were canceled due to non-payment of premium, although their bank accounts were being debited by the Franklins’.

One of the victims was provided with a bogus automobile insurance identification card to make it appear coverage was placed and two victims suffered uninsured losses in excess of $3,000. It is also alleged that Mrs. Franklin, pretending to be one of the accident victims, purchased an auto policy via the internet in an attempt to cover the loss. She allegedly called the insurance company, again pretending to be the policyholder, and gave a false accident date in her conversation with the insurance company representative that was recorded. The insurance company discovered that the accident had actually occurred a day prior to the placement of coverage and conducted their own investigation where Mrs. Franklin admitted to calling on behalf of the insured.

The Department of Insurance launched the investigation after one victim attempted to renew her vehicle registration and was told that her proof of insurance would not be accepted. The victim immediately filed a complaint with the Department of Insurance.

This case is being prosecuted by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office.

Source: CDI

Texas Mutual paid medical and income benefits to Durst after he suffered an on-the-job injury at a New Braunfels golf course in November 2004. However, Texas Mutual contended that Durst’s work injury did not extend to a pre-existing degenerative spine condition, and therefore he was not entitled to workers’ compensation benefits for that condition, including a three-level lumbar fusion surgery. Among other evidence, Texas Mutual relied on the opinion of a board-certified orthopedic surgeon in questioning the extent of the compensable injury.

Represented by Houston plaintiff’s attorney Mike Doyle, Durst alleged that Texas Mutual acted in bad faith in this dispute.

In issuing a November 14 letter explaining his reasons for granting summary judgment in favor of Texas Mutual, Judge Kirkendall wrote that Texas Mutual could not be held liable for bad faith in its dealings with Durst. “A bona fide dispute does not rise to the level of bad faith,” the judge wrote.

Judge Kirkendall noted first that Texas Mutual, in disputing the medical question involved, had relied on a doctor’s opinion; second, that five other doctors testified that the doctor’s opinion Texas Mutual relied on was reasonable; and third, that no medical expert said the opinion that Texas Mutual relied on was in bad faith or outside the medical norm.

“We are heartened by the ruling,” Russell Oliver, president of Texas Mutual, said. “The District Court applied a key and often misunderstood part of the law — the difference between an honest difference of opinion and bad faith. When the benefits dispute turns on medical expert opinion, we have to be able to rely on a doctor’s opinion. Doctors sometimes disagree, and sometimes the Division of Workers’ Compensation agrees with the other side’s doctor. That is all that happened in this case.”

“The vast majority of workers’ compensation claims at Texas Mutual,” Mr. Oliver added, “are paid with no dispute at all. Whether the claim is a small dollar claim or a large one, our goals are to pay correctly for actual workplace injuries, help the worker recover from actual workplace injuries, and get back to work when they’re recovered from their workplace injuries.”

Source: Texas Mutual Insurance Company, texasmutual.com