Coming up this year is my 70th birthday and over the past 40 years I've watched the business of the Acord Form cause so much TROUBLE. It seems exceptional trouble with construction contracts.
I just finished up with another cat fight with someone sitting in an office of the General Contractor. They wanted me to place something in the DOO of the 25 that I would not do. Period! My E&O has never had a nic and at this stage of the game it "ain't gonna happen."
How many times have we read about the E&O claims, the CSR in an agency that issues AI status before it is written to the policy, agents promising things that are not true.
In light of the T-Mobile USA v. Selective Insurance Company of America decision I say, it is time to end the use of the 25. Some municipalities have started and they started years ago. They want a copy of the policy. I say good! In the digital age here is the real policy. I already send copies of the endorsements with the COI. I have on occasions sent the 300 pages of CGL & BAP.
If a company like T-Mobile can use the "I'm too stupid to understand" plan to win a case, imagine the very large door that opens.
One time I was reading a contract that wanted all shareholders to have AI status. Oh really! At the time this company had 208 million shares outstanding. I said no, provided their attorney with good reasons why not. I did say ok if the attorney was willing to give me names and addresses of "all shareholders". You know what --- attorney agreed it wasn't needed and it was stricken from the contract. The entire idea of risk transfer has reached a point of absurd.
Talking to one of the underwriters the other day and we both will be retiring this year and we are both very happy about it.
SO yeah, I say take the dogs bone away (Acord 25) the dogs will howl, they may even be trained to become reasonable again. Yeah there really was a time of reasonable risk transfer.
I just finished up with another cat fight with someone sitting in an office of the General Contractor. They wanted me to place something in the DOO of the 25 that I would not do. Period! My E&O has never had a nic and at this stage of the game it "ain't gonna happen."
How many times have we read about the E&O claims, the CSR in an agency that issues AI status before it is written to the policy, agents promising things that are not true.
In light of the T-Mobile USA v. Selective Insurance Company of America decision I say, it is time to end the use of the 25. Some municipalities have started and they started years ago. They want a copy of the policy. I say good! In the digital age here is the real policy. I already send copies of the endorsements with the COI. I have on occasions sent the 300 pages of CGL & BAP.
If a company like T-Mobile can use the "I'm too stupid to understand" plan to win a case, imagine the very large door that opens.
One time I was reading a contract that wanted all shareholders to have AI status. Oh really! At the time this company had 208 million shares outstanding. I said no, provided their attorney with good reasons why not. I did say ok if the attorney was willing to give me names and addresses of "all shareholders". You know what --- attorney agreed it wasn't needed and it was stricken from the contract. The entire idea of risk transfer has reached a point of absurd.
Talking to one of the underwriters the other day and we both will be retiring this year and we are both very happy about it.
SO yeah, I say take the dogs bone away (Acord 25) the dogs will howl, they may even be trained to become reasonable again. Yeah there really was a time of reasonable risk transfer.
