David Fermani said:
Yes, of course businesses have a huge focus turn a profit, but every company chooses the path they lead as far as how they recognize their customers. I can think of several companies I’ve recognized as airing on the side of the customer (Home Depot / Apple / Sprint / large Restaurants chains for example). I’m well aware that many (such as health insurers) are not socially & evironmentally concious, but many (including Auto Insurers) take customer service into consideration when operating their claims. If they didn’t, customer concessions wouldn’t regularly be made. My company and many others do this often(when justified), so you can’t say it doesn’t happen. Again, tell me the LAW that states that all corporations have to put money before servicing their customers because I just don’t believe it. The highlighted portion of your quote reflects that they can air on the side of the clients when it can lead to positive cash flow as I mentioned that is exactly what Auto Insurance companies regularly do. When they make customer service gesture$, they retain policyholders/customers and in turn more revenue. If they didn’t they lose any chance of recouping their losses. This is a common business practice for most businesses that excel in customer service.
Yes, and I completely agree, SOMETIMES, companies (insurance and otherwise) will side with the customer. Sometimes it’s done to retain a customer / policyholder in order to gain additional revenues. For example, a cellular provider allowing a customer to renew their contract a few months early and get a discounted phone because their last one was stolen. Absolutely these instances do happen, but that doesn’t change the fact that in general, insurance companies are not there to help you, they’re there to maximize profits anyway they can. Just because you see the odd exception here and there, doesn’t mean it’s the norm. As for pointing out the law, I can’t exactly copy and paste the basis of corporate law and shareholder rights and policies. And there is no “one line” that says that corporations have to put money before servicing their customers. Corporations have to put money first, end of story. There’s no specific list of things that money comes before, just simply that profit is legally the most important interest.
David Fermani said:
I guess this is where we can agree to disagree because I don’t think you fully understand what Auto Insurance companies care about without putting an inaccurate spin on things from looking from the outside in. How do you know Scott was low balled? You don’t. Especially without 1st hand comparing both Evaluations and knowing the regional values for his car. I know of no Auto Insurance company that intentionally low balls anyone without opening themselves up to a huge bad faith lawsuit. Fact! It’s not a practice that insurance companies do although I understand you’d like to think that’s all they stand for. It’s been ingrained into some people’s mind as they immediately complain they are being low balled and ripped off any time they even begin to file a claim. You could give them twice as much as their car is worth and they’d still cry due to the negative perception fueled by people who think Insurance Companies are out to get you.
I’m simply stating that Scott appears to have been low balled. The only reason I bring it up, is because his own insurance company paid out the amount he was looking for. So if the offender’s insurance company isn’t low balling, then why did Scott’s own insurance company offer to pay the higher amount ? It just doesn’t seem to add up. And the fact that the only reason you state insurance companies don’t intentionally low ball anyone is because they open themselves up to a bad faith lawsuit, well, that says something in and of itself. When the only reason you don’t do something is because you might be sued, your intentions can’t be THAT good to be begin with.
David Fermani said:
Unless you’ve were directly involved in senior mgmt in a large corporation, your insinuation about what I’ve been exposed to is inaccurate. I’ve been to several conferences that were hosted by top senior level claim people as well as being part of roundtable discussions supported by senior management where we gave our input into updating processes to not improve only our internal processes, but those processes that would directly help our customers when filing a claim. Again, I’ve never heard anything spill out remotely resembling screwing over the customer to boost our profit sharing.
You think senior management or the exec level would actually TELL employees that they’re trying to boost profits by screwing over customers ? And as far as those conferences and round table discussions are concerned, they’re a complete farce and a joke. I mean there’s so many examples out there it would be impossible to list them all, but just look at the whole mortgage collapse situation. You can have all the round table discussions you like with your employees, but if you’re not going to listen to them, then what’s the point ?
David Fermani said:
Are these Auto Claims you’re referring to? You’re comparing US claim workflows to 3rd world continents with countries that are filled with corruption, undeveloped and with a lack of money in general? That’s ridiculous. Different Auto Insurance companies structure their claims response based on their own Best Practices and what they are financially capable of doing. Some have expectations of completing a claim within 24hrs, others a little bit longer. You’re going way overboard with your anti-insurance conspiracy theories to think they’d resort to 3rd world tactics to stall claim processing.
I’m comparing workflows in heavily populated regions outside of North America, yes. Brazil might not be as wealthy or have a standard of living as Canada or the USA, but they’re far from being in the stone age either. And my point is not comparing privately owned corporations in both regions, I’m talking about corporations that own and operate services in BOTH areas. The fact that a big conglomerate like Citi Group can turn out 24-hour claims in the USA, yet take 240+ days in Brazil, is absurd. You can try and argue that it’s because there’s corruption there and underdevelopment and poor employees, but let’s be honest, the real reason is a lack of strong government regulation that’s enforced. That’s the ONLY reason why claims can be done so quickly here in Canada / the USA. You ever see the “returns” line in a Wal-Mart ? Why do you think that counter is staffed with maybe 5% of the staff as compared to the cashiers lines ? Sure, not as many people return things, but the ratio is certainly nothing compared to what’s in practice. Take any industry and you’ll see the same thing.
David Fermani said:
Barry’s truck must have been appraised by a newbie that didn’t have a clue about cars, better yet calculating one’s value. They didn’t have hardly any of the packages and options correct, as well as the mileage and condition which led to a substantial difference. After I reviewed his evaluation they immediately updated their value and apologized to him and he settled amicably. I also helped Mike Phillips a while back too just like I offered to do the same for Scott. I guess it’s just my Insurance background that forces me to keep wanting to help people. Oh wait, I guess we all just want to screw everyone over? J/K and only having fun. :biggrin1:
Hey I think it’s great that you’re offering to help out, don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to label you as a bad guy. So maybe Barry simply did get a newbie, but the fact is, this does happen much more regularly than it should. I’m sure there’s lots of nice folks like yourself that really do want to help, and I’m not trying to say that anyone and everyone who works for an insurance company is a bad person with bad intentions. My point is simply that for a company who’s primary focus is to HELP people when they need it, a privately held for-profit corporation might not be the best business model. Put it this way, what if the public school system was run as a for-profit corporation ? Would teachers spend extra time with students who were having difficulties ? Would they stay late to finish a lesson plan, hold parent-teacher interviews on their own time, etc ? Ask the same types of questions about your fire department, police service, etc. There are simply some things in life that shouldn't be run as a for-profit business.
