- 30,540
Just how old are you? It would take me 110 years to pay $50,000 in E & O premium.After paying probably 50k in premiums over the years
Napa E&0 coverage not good
- Thread starter Bear Munro
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #12
Bear Munro
New Member
- 9
One I pay premiums for RIA coverage and two, I am old. Old enough to remember when insurance companies were a tad more honorable than some today.
- 30,540
Here you go, it'll take you 53 years to hit the next $50K in premium.
RIA E&O Insurance Programs - RIA, IAR, Registered Representative, CFP
- Thread starter
- #14
Bear Munro
New Member
- 9
Wrong, and what's your point????? My RIA coverage for my agency has bumped up to 3k to 3500 per year many years. So just 10 years of premiums were likely 30 to 35K. The point you so well missed is that it doesn't matter how much you pay if a company like Napa's, National Casualty forgoes its end of the bargain. Then it is no bargain.
- 30,540
- Thread starter
- #16
Bear Munro
New Member
- 9
Cartoons? Distractions?. That's just about the same lame tactics Napa has given when a serious matter confronted our business. They are all in for premium gathering but apparently all out for the upholding of their end of the contract.
- 30,540
NAPA is no more an insurance company than AARP is. AARP is an insurance marketing orginization for consumers, NAPA is an insurance marketing organization for insurance agents.
Can you tell me what NAPA's A.M. Best rating is?
Your beef's not with NAPA.
- Thread starter
- #18
Bear Munro
New Member
- 9
No kidding?? What do you work for Napa or just date someone there? NAPA is a marketing company who I would assume earns commissions offering among other things what they view as high-quality E&O coverage from reputable companies. The problem is I have found personally their companies like National Casualty, are not reliable and this may pose a huge danger for unsuspecting buyers of E&O coverage. E&O is nothing to be trifled with whether agent or company.
- 30,540
Hahaha, no I don't work for NAPA. I'm just making the point that NAPA's no more at fault, than AARP would be if UHC or New York Life didn't pay a claim.
I agree that NAPA should only offer the best companies.
- Thread starter
- #20
Bear Munro
New Member
- 9
Yeah, they should but they don't. Wow! are they in for a surprise. The morons don't realize that by denying coverage in my state they allow themselves to be sued under the same current suit against me. In other words, these chiseling stooges will spend more money defending themselves and likely pay all my court cost and big bad faith damages to boot. What they have done has been labeled as totally reckless by great attorneys in my state. They got bad advice and they are going to pay for it. My advice would be to not use NAPA until they address their bad apples.
Similar threads
