I was STARTLED when I got my latest Lawyer produced booklet from my business insurance provider. I have a really small policy. But the first three pages of WAVERS were devoted to "WE DO NOT INSURE AGAINST Y2K PROBLEMS OR LAWSUITS" This was big time! Somebody is seriously trying to create a wall between Y2K and liablity.... It is hitting home... These riders are new, they were not in last year renewal. I have not gotten my homeowners insurance booklet but I can imagine.......

What have you seen from your insurance providers????

-- helium (heliumavid@yahoo.com), March 22, 1999

Answers

Sen. Dodd was waving one of these around on C-Span about a month ago saying they needed to check into it.

-- Puddintame (dit@dot.com), March 22, 1999.

Until 2 years ago I was an insurance broker with 12 years experience. Home policies should insure for Y2K, however MAKE SURE YOUR AGENT IS COMPLIANT. I went to work for a company that made software for agents and companies- we estimate that 20-25% of all insurance agencies will go under in 2000. We would call some to tell them that it's too late, sell your business (to protect ourselves legally), however many old timers don't think this is a problem and hang up. Most insurance companies will make it, although a few will not. The problem from this industry is the litigation. Agent and Broker magazine ran a 4 part article on this last year. For a claim to be covered, for instance, it must be "fortuitous", or unexpected. But is Y2K fortuitous? In terms of commerical insurance, the flowchart of liability between agents, clients, reinsureres, companies, was so complicated a civil engineer was needed to figure it out. What if an agent in good faith sells a completed operations policy to a client that in good faith has become compliant? And the insurance company issues the policy in good faith because of what the client said. But now the client's widget is in a machine interacting with a non-compliant chip from another company. The machine fails and a lawsuit is brought against the non-compliant company. Except that the non-compliant company sues the compliant one because his supposedly compliant chip was responsible for the failure by virtue of design. The insurer now rejects the claim so the compliant manufacturer now sues the agent for errors and omissions... You get the idea. I can only come to the conclusion that Y2K will force a suspension of civil actions in court, but that has negative consequences as well.

-- Jack (retro50@snet.net), March 22, 1999.

The insurance industry started lobbying state legislatures to amend their statutes to allow for such Y2K exemptions about two years ago. Last I heard, 46 or more states had done so.

-- Watchful (seethesea@msn.com), March 22, 1999.

There are also claims denied due to damage during riots, wars, and the like. So, whether or not y2k language is on the policy, the looting and burning already fall under some of the categories of "conditions" that insurance companies won't cover. If the natural disaster doesn't happen just like the insurance company says it should, don't expect them to be of any help. I dislike insurance companies very, very much.

Mr. K
***dislikes being ripped off by being "required" to have homeowners and car insurance for mortage and auto club reasons***

-- Mr. Kennedy (not@war.time), March 23, 1999.

Noticed exclusions also in very small print buried on travel/health policies and also holiday booking forms.

Just how are they going to still operate those huge cruise liners with such tight turnarounds,particularly of food ?

Noticed in the Times,yesterday,P&O are looking to their cruise ships to generate the profit next year.Do they know something we don't????

-- Chris (griffen@globalnet.co.uk), March 23, 1999.