<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Absence of procedures to notify reinsurance is a basis for bad faith</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theclaimsspot.com/2010/02/17/absence-of-procedures-to-notify-reinsurance-is-a-basis-for-bad-faith-renewing-the-written-guidelines-debate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theclaimsspot.com/2010/02/17/absence-of-procedures-to-notify-reinsurance-is-a-basis-for-bad-faith-renewing-the-written-guidelines-debate/</link>
	<description>Identifying opportunities is easier when you know how to SPOT the issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 11:37:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marc Lanzkowsky</title>
		<link>http://theclaimsspot.com/2010/02/17/absence-of-procedures-to-notify-reinsurance-is-a-basis-for-bad-faith-renewing-the-written-guidelines-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-204</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc Lanzkowsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2010 13:03:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theclaimsspot.com/wordpress/?p=690#comment-204</guid>
		<description>Under the duty to act in good faith - regardless of whether there is a provision I would think they could be. It is always best to report than not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Under the duty to act in good faith &#8211; regardless of whether there is a provision I would think they could be. It is always best to report than not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cathy</title>
		<link>http://theclaimsspot.com/2010/02/17/absence-of-procedures-to-notify-reinsurance-is-a-basis-for-bad-faith-renewing-the-written-guidelines-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-200</link>
		<dc:creator>cathy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2010 02:49:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theclaimsspot.com/wordpress/?p=690#comment-200</guid>
		<description>privoded that there is no claim notification preivsion, shall the reinsured be responsible for dealying claim notification?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>privoded that there is no claim notification preivsion, shall the reinsured be responsible for dealying claim notification?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philip J. Loree Jr.</title>
		<link>http://theclaimsspot.com/2010/02/17/absence-of-procedures-to-notify-reinsurance-is-a-basis-for-bad-faith-renewing-the-written-guidelines-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip J. Loree Jr.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:52:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theclaimsspot.com/wordpress/?p=690#comment-24</guid>
		<description>Marc, 

I agree with Craig:  an excellent post.  I greatly appreciate the mention, too.  

Let&#039;s try to keep the dialogue going on this issue, as it is both controversial and very relevant to both insurers and reinsurers.  It would be great to hear, for example, some of the key issues you seek to address when devising (or revising) claims guidelines.  

Phil</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Marc, </p>
<p>I agree with Craig:  an excellent post.  I greatly appreciate the mention, too.  </p>
<p>Let&#8217;s try to keep the dialogue going on this issue, as it is both controversial and very relevant to both insurers and reinsurers.  It would be great to hear, for example, some of the key issues you seek to address when devising (or revising) claims guidelines.  </p>
<p>Phil</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Great Debate Over Written Claims Guidelines and Procedures &#124; Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum</title>
		<link>http://theclaimsspot.com/2010/02/17/absence-of-procedures-to-notify-reinsurance-is-a-basis-for-bad-faith-renewing-the-written-guidelines-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-22</link>
		<dc:creator>The Great Debate Over Written Claims Guidelines and Procedures &#124; Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:07:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theclaimsspot.com/wordpress/?p=690#comment-22</guid>
		<description>[...] recently brought the discussion up to the reinsurance level in his post, &#8220;Absence of Procedures to Notify Reinsurance is a Basis for Bad Faith.&#8221;   He was kind enough to mention what inspired his thoughtful post &#8212; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] recently brought the discussion up to the reinsurance level in his post, &#8220;Absence of Procedures to Notify Reinsurance is a Basis for Bad Faith.&#8221;   He was kind enough to mention what inspired his thoughtful post &#8212; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: uberVU - social comments</title>
		<link>http://theclaimsspot.com/2010/02/17/absence-of-procedures-to-notify-reinsurance-is-a-basis-for-bad-faith-renewing-the-written-guidelines-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-20</link>
		<dc:creator>uberVU - social comments</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:38:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theclaimsspot.com/wordpress/?p=690#comment-20</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Social comments and analytics for this post...&lt;/strong&gt;

This post was mentioned on Twitter by CoverageCounsel: RT @TheClaimsSPOT: New blog post: Absence of procedures to notify reinsurance is a basis for bad faith http://bit.ly/cIJ2ro...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Social comments and analytics for this post&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>This post was mentioned on Twitter by CoverageCounsel: RT @TheClaimsSPOT: New blog post: Absence of procedures to notify reinsurance is a basis for bad faith <a href="http://bit.ly/cIJ2ro.." rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/cIJ2ro..</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig Rowe</title>
		<link>http://theclaimsspot.com/2010/02/17/absence-of-procedures-to-notify-reinsurance-is-a-basis-for-bad-faith-renewing-the-written-guidelines-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-17</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig Rowe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 14:17:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theclaimsspot.com/wordpress/?p=690#comment-17</guid>
		<description>Excellent post, Marc.

No matter how much you may have faith in an employee (or in this case, an insurer) to have the knowledge and ethics to perform a procedure in a certain way, it is always best to have these procedures in writing so that any deviation is clear and measurable.

Not only is it good practice, but as you point out there are legal ramifications in some cases.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent post, Marc.</p>
<p>No matter how much you may have faith in an employee (or in this case, an insurer) to have the knowledge and ethics to perform a procedure in a certain way, it is always best to have these procedures in writing so that any deviation is clear and measurable.</p>
<p>Not only is it good practice, but as you point out there are legal ramifications in some cases.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

