Insurance

Verizon customers vexed by new $2 fee

May 25, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Ventura County Star (California)</p> <p>Phone companies are looking for any reason to increase their profits, said Harvey Rosenfield, founder of the Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights, a consumer advocate group in Santa Monica. "I think it's a consumer outrage," he said.</p>

Justify rates, Allstate told;

May 24, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>State demand could lead to homeowner policy refunds</h3><p class="source">Sacramento Bee (California)</p> <p>Consumer advocates contend that the Allstate withdrawal is aimed at pressuring Poizner to approve higher premiums. They vow to lobby for steep cuts. "The premiums they were charging may have been appropriate four years ago. Their costs went substantially down. They should have lowered (rates)," said Doug Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. "They need to return money to the customers they overcharged."</p>

WILDFIRES SPUR INSURERS TO CUT SOME COVERAGE

May 24, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The Arizona Republic (Phoenix)</p> <p>"It certainly isn't fair for these insurers to be dumping these last-minute requirements on homeowners," said Carmen Balber of the Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights. "It does make sense to require homeowners to take reasonable precautions, but some of the excessive demands that we've heard from homeowners are over the top."</p>

State to grill Allstate on premiums;

May 24, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Hearings are ordered that could lead to refunds to homeowners. The company says its rates are fair.</h3><p class="source">Los Angeles Times</p> <p>Douglas Heller, executive director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica, contends that Proposition 103 puts Poizner on firm ground to call for premium refunds, if merited. "Proposition 103 is very clear that insurance companies can't overcharge customers," he said.</p>

California demands Allstate justify homeowner rates

May 24, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Associated Press</p> <p>Allstate was also criticized Wednesday by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, which said the company has been overcharging residents by $326 million a year. The group called for a 40 percent reduction in rates under Proposition 103, which it says would result in average individual savings of about $362 a year.</p>

PROPOSITION 103 FINALLY NEAR TO THE END OF A LONG ROAD

May 23, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The Daily News of Los Angeles</p> <p>Over the course of the next year, customers of other companies will see the changes, said Doug Heller, executive director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. "Sometimes the only thing worse in the delay of justice is to give up the pursuit of it,'' Heller said. "Here we have resolution. Finally the peoples' word will finally take hold. It's taken a darn long time though.''</p>

Insurance companies try to cut losses in wildfire hotspots

May 21, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Associated Press</p> <p>The inspections have angered homeowners and watchdog groups that accuse the companies of trying to cut risk at the expense of customers, even while industry profits soar. The complaints echo concerns raised after Hurricane Katrina, when many insurance companies increased rates or dropped policies along the Gulf Coast. "It certainly isn't fair for these insurers to be dumping these last-minute requirements on homeowners," said Carmen Balber of The Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights.</p>

Quick Route to the Inner Circle

May 17, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<font face="verdana,sans-serif" size="2">In my shock at the size of Arnold's latest $250,000 contribution, I misread the name of the donor. Bill Powers, not Bill Gross, was the PIMCO donor noted below. It's still Powers' first...</font>

Lawyers Slam Blue Cross Settlement

May 17, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Los Angeles Daily Journal</p> <p>Jerry Flanagan of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights said, "Blue Cross is now agreeing to live by the letter of the law. "But the fact that they will not reinstate rescinded policies is absolutely reprehensible. Those people are now uninsurable unless the DMHC, as the regulator, requires Blue Cross to reinstate."</p>

Court Rejects Mercury Insurance Overcharge Case Settlement for Second Time

May 17, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">City News Service (Los Angeles, CA)</p> <p>Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Victoria Chaney turned down the proposed deal on Tuesday in part because it would have allowed Mercury Insurance to offer $45 coupons requiring policyholders to buy more insurance from the company instead of refunding the alleged $76 million in overcharges, according to the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights.</p>

Democrats prescribe bigger health levy

May 16, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Los Angeles Times</p> <p>"Four million people in a bulk purchasing pool isn't going to drive down premiums," said Jamie Court, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, a Santa Monica advocacy group that is pressing for insurance rates to be directly regulated by the state.</p>

California Democrats unveil health plans;

May 16, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>PROPOSED FEE WORRIES BUSINESSES</h3><p class="source">San Jose Mercury News (California)</p> <p>For example, the Democrats assume it would cost $224 a month to insure a person covered by the state insurance pool -- a price significantly lower than the average private health insurance plan. Democrats said the state can use its financial might to leverage lower rates from insurers, but others argue that's naive. The Democratic proposals "overestimate the willingness of insurers to offer lower premiums," said Jamie Court, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, who is calling on the state to regulate health insurance premiums.</p>