Bigbrog

You seriously have a problem with what I can only assume is your enjoyment of making yourself look extremely stupid. Take the L and stop posting.

While I tend to agree with the intent of what you are saying, but turn that around on yourself...have you met Trump in person?

How much did you give him?

You are pathetic

I wish someone would take the time to put together all the doom and gloomers about the climate/pollution/etc since the 60's through to now and see the resemblance and how ridiculous the claims are. Who knows, maybe someone has done this already?

How ironic you think what I posted sounds like babble...they are words you have been using and you are right, it is babble...LOL Do like mspart said....take the L

Weak/stupid/simple minded/etc. take...being a woman has and had nothing to do with who America voted to be president. Hate when people go to race or sex as an excuse for things...so dumb!

What you sound like in your latest posts - "Well I was there...on the peripheral...but I left before he actually got choked...so I know he was wrong with what he did...because I was involved in a situation where someone yelled something once. I can prove it because there are pictures of me being there...not sure who or where the pictures are but I know for sure someone was taking pictures..."

But he was in a situation similar, but not the same, and he knows how he would act and knows he wouldn't get arrested because he would act perfectly, and he can't understand how everyone else in the world, even in different situations than he has been in, doesn't act exactly like him. And oh yeah, he got pulled over by a cop once so knows exactly how cops should act in every situation, and clearly the cops in this situation didn't act the way he would have acted if he was them.

We = about 90% of the posters on here

I looked up the top insurers (homeowners) in FL for 2024 and through the first quarter of the year (Residential Market Share Reports), as expected, they are obscure/smaller insurance companies (there was one of the biggies, state farm, but I believe they brokerage FL policies). This may explain what you presented above (I am taking your word for it in terms of the numbers you are reporting here)...most if not all of the smaller/obscure insurers sub out their claims process and those adjusters don't have any vested interest in the company or the insured; thus, more often than not aren't doing a quality job adjusting the claims. The company I work for did a project looking at our contingent claims adjuster spend versus their claim's accuracy (my employee led the effort) and we drastically reduced the amount of contingent adjusters due to their inability to meet SLA's and their claim accuracy (both overpaying and underpaying) and we saved millions of dollars by doing so and were able to revamp our claims process to account for the additional claims all the while drastically increasing claims accuracy and reducing litigated and/or challenged claims. I am done with the back and forth...I know I won't change your mind no matter how much I explain how the real world of insurance works, you have your anecdotal "experiences" and are going to stick with that. Sorry for boring everyone with my back and forth and technical insurance claims "stuff". Bottom line is NO ONE deserves to be gunned down for working for an insurance companies and Insurance companies CAN NOT base their claims practices and policies on their corporate financial goals.

When did I say it was my personal experience?? I am telling you the experience of being in the industry...and having worked at revamping a fortune 300 insurance companies claims processes and operating model for 7 years I have a pretty good idea of what does and doesn't happen in the industry. And if the information you claim is easy to access, please do share as it is not required to document and share this information from regulatory standpoint. I can tell you that no one that I worked with in claims (those who have 30+ years in the industry) have ever had to deal with a public claims adjuster...again it may have happened, but it had to have been a one-off situation that was not a big deal because no one ever remembered dealing with it.

Which insurance companies (specifically) do PCA's get hired to go after the most? Answer you will never be able to find out this information. Thus, your statement about insurance companies regularly short changing customers is just that...a statement. If your opinion is based on because there are PCA's in the first place than have at it because it isn't based in reality. My opinion and experience is that they exist to work on the fringes of one-off scenarios, and not to address an overall systemic issue of the big bad insurance companies screwing over their customers.

Well...if you are talking about subrogation of claims that is one thing; however, hiring an independent adjuster to look at your claim with no subrogation than that is another thing. Most of the "public adjusters" are looking at subrogation of claims when the company who they have a policy through doesn't offer subrogation (think cheap insurance providers). Subrogation is for going after OTHER insurance companies for money paid out for claims that their client was not responsible for...ex. you get into a car accident and the other driver has a different insurance company, your insurance will pay all applicable fees (repair, rental, medical - if needed), etc.) then based on an investigation, a percent at fault is determined and if the other driver is at fault for the majority of the accident then your insurance subrogation division will "go after" the other insurance company to recoup the money already paid out on the claim based on the percentage the other company is responsible for. In addition, to your scenario above, are you wondering how a "public adjuster" is making their money or how an insurance company somehow ties their business profit goals to claims...I am confused. Or is it some of you just want to make insurance companies that "bad guy" in every scenario?? At least be honest. As my opinion of insurance companies...I work for a very good insurance company that does the right thing...for the most part. However, do I understand the overall business model of insurance companies and to the general public I could see why they dislike them; however, as someone pointed out, let's see what your opinion is when you actually need one. I'll say it again, Insurance companies make their money via investments...a lot run in the negative in terms of premium received versus amount of claims paid out...example, most companies run at 1.05 ratio which means for every $1.00 they bring in from premium they pay out $1.05 in claims.

Isn't it amazing that he is arguing about this...claiming how he claims he would act is exactly how every single person in the world should react...even while admitting to never being in their situation...what a joke!

LOL...who said they are controlled 100% by the regulators?? If you truly know about how it all works you would know that policies are reviewed and need to be approved by state regulators before they can be sold in that state. Not to mention you are totally changing the argument now, as you mention nothing about the claims you and other have made saying that insurance companies' policies and goals center around denying claims...which is unequivocally FALSE! As far as YOU claiming my credibility is shot because I work in insurance, that is laughable...so you telling people what it's like to be a cop holds more credibility than an actual cop?? That is some bass ackward thinking right there. By the way, I could give to snits how successful UnitedHealth care is or was, I am just calling out people who are in fact ignorant and post like they know things that they clearly don't and yet call my ignorant and naive...LOL

LOL...hate to burst your bubbles but I actually work in the insurance industry and know exactly how it all works. There are very specific regulations around tying your business goals to your claims practices other than those centered around customer service. Regulators look for this all the time! They focus on claims practices and if you in anyway have company policies around denying claims or company policies that are other than pay claims with as close to 100% accuracy, no more no less, they will fine you and even shut you down if it is too egregious. I'd estimate that about 95% of claims that are denied are due to policy language contained in the insurance policy a person purchased. More than likely the person didn't know exactly what was and wasn't covered when they purchased their policy and then throw a fit when a claim is denied because it is for something that wasn't covered in their policy. Why is that the insurance companies' fault?? What's naive and ignorant is people claiming they know how certain companies work when clearly they don't and then try and tell someone who does know how it works they are wrong...LOL You all have NO idea how this company operates, you have NO clue what their business goals are, and definitely have NO idea what is contained in each individual policy people have purchased.

Maybe you missed the part where I give two snits about what you do or don't care to revisit...if I and others want to talk about it we will...

Not true at all...the company would be shut down by their states department of insurance if that is how they made their claims decisions. Claims decisions CAN NOT be tied directly to company goals or even their policy decisions.

As usual your takes are completely asinine. What is your obsession with turning this into a political thing versus just focusing on the fact that the killer is a whackjob who shot a man in his back like a coward.

Love the people that know EXACTLY what happened and EXACTLY how they would act, and even better, they know how others should act. We need more people like Penny who will stand up against the crazy whackjobs who threaten the lives of other people. People who are against doing so are the pathetic ones and suck as human beings.

Absolutely terrible take and such an ignorant thing to say

YouTube is not a news source