Comprehensive Insurance

Tuesday, 17 March 2020

Safety Uber Alles

Depending on the carrier, one's age and the face amount at (potential) risk, many life insurance applicants muSt undergo a paramedical exam (or more). This usually entails a service obtaining blood and urine specimens, taking a blood pressure reading, and the like. Given the current CV-19 situation, I wasn't surprised to receive this notice form our primary carrier:

"With the coronavirus, ExamOne has been taking precautions when performing exams for your clients. Below is a link to their site for updates on how they are responding and implementing safeguards. Due to the declared state of emergency requiring all non-essential businesses to close, examiners are no longer performing exams in Pennsylvania (entire state) and the San Francisco Bay area (San Francisco, San Jose, Oakland, and the surrounding counties). This is effective immediately."

And of course, that moratorium may soon extend to other states, as well.

This means that at least a few folks will gave to wait on their new policies to be underwritten.

Now, there's an interesting twist here: when one initially makes application, if one also includes a check for the first premium with that app, one is issued a "conditional binding receipt." This obligates the company during the underwriting phase, but only so far: "It provides that the applicant is covered immediately from the date of application as long as he or she passes the insurer's underwriting requirements." [emphasis in original]

One can imagine the role this little tidbit may end up playing here...

[Hat Tip: FoIB Major B]

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2TWGPKz

Medicare 101 - Math Is Hard

In 2013 Mayor Rahmbo Emanuel instituted a cost cutting measure that saved Chicago "tens of millions of dollars". And retired city workers paid the price.

Among the perks promised to older city workers — affordable health insurance in retirement.

But in 2013, then-Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced he was ending the benefit to save cash.

Retirees who started working before 1986 were hit the hardest.

They never contributed to Medicare during their employment — the city’s choice, not theirs.

As a result, many now don’t qualify for government health insurance, even at age 65.

For a single retiree, the annual cost is now more than $33,000, whereas before it cost a few thousand dollars. - WGNTV News

More than $33,000 per year . . .

But, consider this.

Medicare Part A premium $458 (2020) - Current premium for those who do not have 40 quarters of Medicare wages.

Medicare Part B premium $145 (2020)

$458 + $145 = $503 x 12 = $6,036

$33,000 - $6,036 = $26,964

Math is hard . . .

Never let a serious crisis go to waste.

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2WrA0Tf

Monday, 16 March 2020

Hunh: CV-19 testing - Covered?

So-called "excepted benefit" plans, which include Short Term and Travel Medical policies, have gotten short-shrift in the CV-19 discussion, but that may be changing (for eh good). These policies, which are not ACA-compliant (NTTAWWT), may also include Coronovirus testing.

Here's why:

These plans, while exempt from federal oversight, are still generally subject to rules and reg's put forth by the individual states in which they're sold:

"In Washington state, for example, Mike Kreidler, the insurance commissioner, is requiring all health insurers in the state to cover testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes Covid-19 pneumonia, without imposing preauthorization requirements, co-payment requirements or deductibles, at least until May ."

In other words: "free."

GeoBlue, for instance, which offers ravel medical plans, "has announced that it will cover medically necessary, prescribed SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing at no cost to the enrollee."

As has National General on their Short Term Medical plans.

And other carriers are also stepping up.

Kudos!

Now we just have to wait for the tests to be (more?) widely available.

Also: Wash your hands!

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/3d3j4bf

From the P&C Files: CV-19 Exclusions

The other day, we learned that Business Interruption coverage is unlikely to extend to business that (temporarily) close their doors while the pandemic plays out. Turns out, there's likely a few more lines of coverage that will likely exclude CV-1-related claims.

Our good friend (and P&C guru) Bill M tips us to this item:

"U.S. P&C insurers face 'limited exposures' from coronavirus"

"While the virus will undoubtedly impact the health and life insurance markets, the U.S. property & casualty (P&C) sector may emerge relatively unscathed once the pandemic subsides."

Okay, I'll bite: why is that?

Well, it comes back to something we've seen before:

"Bill taught me a new phrase, and suggested I use it whenever I'm looking at these kinds of (potential) claims: "cause of loss." That is, which circumstances are specifically covered, and which are specifically excluded."

And here's where that phrase comes into play, CV-19-wise:

"However, if a factory closes because of fears that an infected worker contaminated equipment, BI coverage could be triggered. “But even in this case,” Fitch says, “claim exposures would likely be limited by policy sub-limits.”

This is different from the situation we discussed this past Friday: in this case, there seems to be an actual physical cause; but again, even that claim will probably be limited in scope.

This would also apply, for example, to supply chain disruptions and even travel interruption plans.

We discussed this a couple of weeks ago:

"Plans where the Cancel for Any Reason upgrade has been purchased allows travelers to decide for themselves whether to travel or cancel their trip according to the terms of the plan."

One can imagine there's been a substantial uptick in interest in those kinds of plans, but as the article notes, "the adverse impact insurers will likely face will be from a decrease in demand" as folks decide to maybe trade in a staycation for that cruise (at least for the nonce). And it doesn't have to be international travel, either:

A colleague told me the other day about a friend of his who had tickets for the A-10 (?) basketball tourney in New York. He cabbed from the airport to his hotel, checked in, and learned that the event ha been canceled. Okay, disappointing, but we'll just take in a show, right?

Ummm:

"Broadway Shuts Down: Performances Canceled Through April 12 Due to COVID-19 Pandemic"

/sigh

Now, one area where carriers may see specific exposure is event cancellation (see above). When basketball and now even golf tournaments are canceled (or postponed), there may well be valid claims, depending on what type of coverage the organizers bought (if any). For example, "if the Olympics were to be canceled, Moody’s asserts that “losses could become material for some insurers,” with industry experts estimating insurance coverage for the games to be around $2 billion."

That's a lot of gold.

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/38PexGc

Friday, 13 March 2020

Business: Interrupted (COVID-19 edition)

We've blogged on the subject of Business Interruption coverage before, most recently here:

"[W]hen a business must temporarily close its doors due to damage to or destruction of business property, Business Interruption insurance coverage pays for business income lost while the property is rebuilt. This coverage is intended to help keep the company in business while recovery is underway."

In that case, it was a burned up food truck, but we've also addressed weather and even civil unrest-related cases. But what about health-related ones, specifically as they may arise from businesses deciding to (temporarily?) close their doors "out of an abundance of caution?"

Well, got this from one of my P&C gurus:

"In the event of my absence, if anyone for commercial lines calls and asks if there is any business income coverage due to their business shutting down during the Coronavirus outbreak, the answer is "No"."

And why is this?

"No direct physical loss."

Which makes sense, since the physical premises haven't actually been affected.

But what if the government mandates that your business close up (at least temporarily)?

Still outta luck.

Why?

Same reason.

The key is that the coverage is tied to the physical premises, not the business itself.

Caveat: This is true at least in Ohio; as always, consult with your own agent about your specific coverage.

[Hat Tip: FoIB Teresa S and Bill M]

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2TKMC5X

Thursday, 12 March 2020

COVID-19 vs Nonna & Nanno

Shot:

"It is a fact that we will have to choose [whom to treat] ... prioritizing younger, otherwise healthy patients over older patients or those with pre-existing conditions."

So, essentially a death sentence for Italian Bubbeh's and Zaydie's.

Chaser:

"Coronavirus patients who refuse to self-isolate face murder charges in Italy"

#EmptyThreat, no?

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/3aO2cDr

HSA vs COVID-19

This is big:

"The Internal Revenue Service today advised that high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) can pay for 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)-related testing and treatment, without jeopardizing their status."https://t.co/ItIWGHrpEu
— Joe Kristan (@joebwan) March 11, 2020

Here's why:

HSA-compliant health insurance plans must include certain features (and are proscribed from including others). In general, so-called first-dollar benefits are strictly prohibited. Waiving co-pays and deductibles for CV-19 testing would seem to fall into this category, so the IRS has pro-actively gone on record waiving the potential fines:

"To facilitate the nation’s response to the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) ... a health plan that otherwise satisfies the requirements to be a high deductible health plan (HDHP) ... will not fail to be an HDHP ... merely because the health plan provides health benefits associated with testing for and treatment of COVID-19 without a deductible, or with a deductible below the minimum deductible (self only or family) for an HDHP."

Sweet.

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/38KKnnF