The present invention relates to providing a prepackaged insurance product, and more particularly relates to a providing a business owners policy (BOP) with up-front pricing for micro businesses.
Insurance carriers typically underwrite BOPs based on a process as shown in
A target market for property and casualty carriers is small (“micro”) businesses with 0-1 employees, who may or may not have prior insurance. Professional and personal services (for example hairdressers), consultants, real estate agents, and the like are examples of classes of business in which many micro businesses are found.
Addressing the above problems in prior approaches, the system and process of the invention effectively invert and simplify the current process of underwriting BOP by starting with a final price, omitting application of underwriting models to provide risk profiles and a premium based on a customer's individual data, screening for eligibility, and issuing the policy.
Generally described, one embodiment of the invention provides a system for insuring a party, comprising a database containing, for an insurance product, predetermined coverages, predetermined limits, and a fixed premium amount, and containing, for one or more categories of insureds, characteristics of members of the category; a user computing device configured to provide to a carrier automated system information relating to an applicant and a request for a determination whether the applicant is a member of one or more of the categories of insureds in the database eligible for the insurance product; wherein the carrier automated system is configured to receive the information and the request from the user computing device, to compare the information provided relating to the applicant with category characteristics from the database for determining whether the applicant is a member of one or more of the categories of insureds in the database eligible for the insurance product, and to provide a response to the user computing device based on the determination of eligibility, and if the applicant is eligible, the response providing an offer to bind the applicant to the insurance product; and a network allowing the user computing device to access the carrier automated system and allowing the carrier automated system to access the database.
The characteristics of members of a category in the database may, in one embodiment, not include a risk level to be met by an applicant individually. The coverages may include liability coverage.
The carrier automated system may be further configured in an embodiment of the invention to communicate over the network with one or more third party information sources to seek verification of information provided relating to the applicant. The carrier automated system may seek the verification of information at a time selected from prior to providing an offer to bind the applicant to insurance or subsequent to providing an offer to bind the applicant to insurance.
In an embodiment of the invention, the network comprises the Internet, and the carrier automated system comprises a carrier server operating a website.
In an embodiment of the invention, the user computing device may be associated with an agent representing the applicant. Alternatively, the user computing device may be associated with the applicant.
In an embodiment of the invention, the coverages comprise business owners insurance, and the characteristics of a member category include (separately or in combination): business classification, sales volume, number of employees, payroll amount, credit score, or premises size.
According to another embodiment, the invention provides a method for insuring a party, comprising providing a database containing, for an insurance product, predetermined coverages, predetermined limits, and a fixed premium amount, and containing, for one or more categories of insureds, characteristics of members of the category; sending from a user computing device to a carrier automated system over a network information relating to an applicant and a request for a determination whether the applicant is a member of one or more of the categories of insureds in the database eligible for the insurance product; receiving at the carrier automated system the information and the request from the user computing device; comparing at the carrier automated system the information provided relating to the applicant with category characteristics from the database to determine whether the applicant is a member of one or more of the categories of insureds in the database eligible for the insurance product; and providing a response from the carrier automated system to the user computing device based on the determination of eligibility, and if the applicant is eligible, the response including an offer to bind the applicant to the insurance product.
According to another embodiment, the invention provides a storage device having stored thereon instructions executable by a computer for providing a fixed price for predetermined coverages and coverage limits associated with a category of insureds; screening information received relating to a customer to determine whether the customer has predetermined characteristics making the customer eligible for the policy, the predetermined characteristics not including a risk level; and issuing insurance for the predetermined coverages and coverage limits at the fixed price if the customer is eligible.
According to another embodiment, the invention provides a system for insuring a party, comprising: a database containing, for an insurance product, predetermined coverages, predetermined limits, and a fixed premium amount, and containing, for one or more categories of insureds, characteristics of members of the category; a carrier automated system having access to the database and being configured to receive information relating to an applicant and a request for a determination whether the applicant is a member of one or more of the categories of insureds in the database eligible for the insurance product, to compare the information provided relating to the applicant with category characteristics from the database for determining whether the applicant is a member of one or more of the categories of insureds in the database eligible for the insurance product, and if the applicant is eligible, providing an offer to bind the applicant to the insurance product.
From the customer's point of view, the invention eliminates unknown factors (for example by providing an up front price rather than making the customer walk through an application process to reach the price), provides a well-defined product that is easy to understand, and provides a more efficient process.
The present invention now will be described more fully hereinafter with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which some, but not all embodiments of the inventions are shown. Indeed, these inventions may be embodied in many different forms and should not be construed as limited to the embodiments set forth herein; rather, these embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will satisfy applicable legal requirements. Like numbers refer to like elements throughout.
The present invention departs from current underwriting practice by providing a prepackaged insurance product based on class or category of customer, with pre-set coverages and pre-set policy limits, based on qualifying the customer and issuing a policy. It applies readily to a BOP product based on class or category of business, such as micro businesses as described above; but the concept can be expanded to include larger businesses or other customers.
Aspects of the present invention may be implemented in a system as shown in
The system may further include a database 140 accessible by a component of the carrier automated system such as the insurance provider server 150 for the purpose of obtaining information needed to determine eligibility of a customer to obtain a prepackaged BOP or other policy as described below.
Referring again to steps 42 through 45, when using an agency marketing channel, the agent is able to tell the customer the fixed price up front, obtains responses to the required questions, and accesses carrier automated systems to submit the data.
Preferably, at this point in the process when eligibility is being determined, at step 46, in real time, internal carrier or outside data sources are accessed to verify the data on which eligibility was based. At step 47 if the customer fails the eligibility screening or verification, coverage is declined. At step 48, if the customer passes the eligibility screening and verification, the policy is issued. Alternatively, if verification is not done in real time during the process, it may be done subsequent to issuance, and the continuance of the policy may be made dependent on verification of the data provided.
In a direct customer version, such as the case of distribution online, the customer provides the answers to the required questions using the customer computing device 110, and receives either a refusal or issuance of the insurance product.
Customer support is provided efficiently at minimized expense via self service support via an online support web site or a call center.
Examples of criteria that may be used for eligibility screening in step 45 include, alone or in combination:
a. Business classification;
b. Sales volume;
c. Number of employees
d. Payroll amount;
e. Credit score;
f. Premises square footage.
The verification step 46 seeks to corroborate information received from the customer related to the eligibility criteria. For example, sources such as Dun & Bradstreet may provide name verification and confirm the provided class of business. In a more specific example, sources might verify that the customer has a Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN) that is associated with a business within the customer-provided class of business. The customer may be linked to a tradename (DBA) confirmed to be located at the provided address in premises having the provided square footage. Risk of fraud may be reduced by the use of contractual provisions known in the industry.
As an example of a prepackaged BOP as the insurance product of the present invention, a real estate agent might acquire a BOP for a $500 premium with $25,000 in building and personal property coverage and $1 million in general liability coverage. In one embodiment, a BOP according to the invention omits real property coverage when necessary to enable the carrier to offer a fixed fee and maintain profitability. Business personal property coverage might be up to $50,000 (with a deductible such as $250), and business liability up to $500,000/1,000,000.
A BOP according to the invention is efficient for the agent to write and service, and provides a clearly defined market, cross selling opportunities, and opportunities to expand the agent's market. From the carrier's point of view, the customer has fewer opportunities and incentives to say no to the policy, and abandonment rates are lower. The carrier may capture an untapped market and grow with a profitable product. The risk that the prepackaged insurance product will not fit a particular member of the category may be mitigated by careful specification of limits, pre-renewal screening, a premium audit, and/or converting the policyholder to a different policy.
The present invention may be applied to provide insurance coverage to customers in need of insurance other than business owners.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/828,593 entitled, “System and Method for Underwriting a Prepackaged Business Owners Insurance Policy,” filed Oct. 6, 2006, the contents of which are hereby incorporated herein by reference in their entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4831526 | Luchs et al. | May 1989 | A |
4876648 | Lloyd | Oct 1989 | A |
4975840 | DeTore et al. | Dec 1990 | A |
5231571 | D'Agostino | Jul 1993 | A |
5523942 | Tyler et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5673402 | Ryan et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5749081 | Whiteis | May 1998 | A |
5873066 | Underwood et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5970464 | Apte et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5995947 | Fraser et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6012044 | Maggioncalda et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6012047 | Mazonas et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6021403 | Horvitz et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6058369 | Rothstein | May 2000 | A |
6064970 | McMillan et al. | May 2000 | A |
6088686 | Walker et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6105007 | Norris | Aug 2000 | A |
6272528 | Cullen et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6526386 | Chapman et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6594635 | Erlanger | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6684189 | Ryan et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6697824 | Bowman-Amuah | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6823319 | Lynch et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6868386 | Henderson et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6901384 | Lynch et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6904412 | Broadbent et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6938022 | Singhal | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6985886 | Broadbent et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7072841 | Pednault | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7085735 | Hall et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7181427 | DeFrancesco et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7240017 | Labelle et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7277861 | Benson et al. | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7386463 | McCabe | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7610210 | Helitzer et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7711584 | Helitzer et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
20010005829 | Raveis, Jr. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010047327 | Courtney | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020002475 | Freedman et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020023051 | Kunzle et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020026478 | Rodgers et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020029188 | Schmid | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020035488 | Aquila et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020038363 | MacLean | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020040312 | Dhar et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020052835 | Toscano | May 2002 | A1 |
20020059137 | Freeman et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020082860 | Johnson | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020111835 | Hele et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020116228 | Bauer et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020116231 | Hele et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020120474 | Hele et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020128882 | Nakagawa et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020138413 | Creamer et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143680 | Walters et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020147613 | Kennard et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020194033 | Huff | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030036994 | Witzig et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030036996 | Lazerson | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030055778 | Erlanger | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030093302 | Quido et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030125990 | Rudy et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030149658 | Rossbach et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030158758 | Kanazawa et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030167191 | Slabonik et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030171959 | Galloway | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030172025 | Gallina | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030200125 | Erlanger | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030216965 | Libman | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030229522 | Thompson et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030229581 | Green et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030233316 | Hu et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040002915 | McDonald et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040006521 | Diamant et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040019508 | Yaruss et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040019517 | Sennott | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040019558 | McDonald et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040049450 | Lussler | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040059653 | Verkuylen et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040064402 | Dreyer et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040083164 | Schwartz et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040117216 | Dutta et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040128170 | MacKethan et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040128172 | Van Cleave et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040128233 | Jarzmik | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040153362 | Bauer et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040167798 | Hastings | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040172304 | Joao | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040177029 | Hammour et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040215552 | Horn et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050010423 | Bagbey et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050102171 | Ashley et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050108062 | Higgins | May 2005 | A1 |
20050114173 | Harris | May 2005 | A1 |
20050177490 | Pembroke | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050240444 | Wooten et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050240451 | Johnson et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050289046 | Conyack, Jr. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060031159 | Minot et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060033625 | Johnson et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060036473 | Taylor | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060053038 | Warren et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060136274 | Olivier et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060161462 | Sharma | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060212195 | Veith et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060218014 | Walker et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060253305 | Dougherty | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060271465 | McNamar et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070016542 | Rosauer et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070021987 | Binns et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070038485 | Yeransian et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070038488 | Bauer et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070174096 | Cain et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070174179 | Avery | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070226014 | Alemayehu et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080027764 | Marturana et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080065426 | Ziade et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080126128 | Markman | May 2008 | A1 |
20080154651 | Kenefick et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20090048877 | Binns et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090119133 | Yeransian et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090177501 | Grover et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090265190 | Ashley et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100004957 | Ball | Jan 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 935 208 | Aug 1999 | EP |
0 935 208 | Aug 1999 | EP |
WO 9948036 | Sep 1999 | WO |
WO 0191017 | Nov 2001 | WO |
WO 02088889 | Nov 2002 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Danford, David P., Online Mortgage Busines Puts Consumers in Driver's Seat, 1999, pp. 2-8, Mortgage Market Trends. |
Straka, John W., A Shift in the Mortgage Landscape: The 1990's Move to Automated Credit Evaluations, Journal of Housing Research, 2000, pp. 207-232, vol. 11, Issue 2, Fannie Mae Foundation. |
Simon Field, A personalised needs oriented approach to insurance product sales, 2002, pp. 1-4, IBM Zurich Research Laboratory. |
Raffi Kassarjian, Banking's customer imperative: Are you building on your advantage—or losing it?, pp. 1-5, Fall 2006/Winter 2007, vol. 30, #3, View Points, Fair Isaac Corporation. |
Ian Turvill, The 21st century insurer: Beyond price—Successful responses to shrinking opportunities, pp. 11-12, Fall 2006/Winter 2007, vol. 30, #3, View Points, Fair Isaac Corporation. |
View Points, Scotiabank set to reap rewards from customer-centric collections, p. 24, Fall 2006/Winter 2007, vol. 30, #3, View Points, Fair Isaac Corporation. |
Alexander Felfernig, Koba4MS: Selling Complex Products and Services using Knowledge-based Recommender Technologies, 2005, pp. 1-9, IEEE International Conference on E-Commerce Technology. |
Homesite, Homeowners Product Guide for Agents, Guide, Jan. 23, 2007, 33 Pages, Version 2.1, Homesite Insurance Group Inc. |
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research, Economic Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for RESPA Proposed Rule to Simplify and Improve the Process of Obtaining Mortgages to Reduce Settlement Costs to Consumers, Jul. 2002, 100 Pages, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research. |
Ed Connor, Introducing The Final Flood Insurance Rules: Update on Lender Compliance, Watermark, Fall/Winter 1996, pp. 1, 14-15, National Flood Insurance Program. |
LandAmerica Lending Services, Product Features, Mar. 13, 2007, 5 pages, LandAmerica Lender Services. |
Drawing Page—Current Model, Customer Abandonment—Customer Decline Flowchart. |
Acord Corporation, Acord 131 (1/96), Umbrella Section, 1991, 2 pages total, Acord Corporation. |
Meg Green, Automated Underwriting Helps Safeco Rate Commercial Risks, vol. 106, No. 1, p. 106, May 1, 2005, Best's Review. |
Amoroso, R., Secrets to Successful Commercial Segmentation, vol. 107, Issue 3, 6 pages, Jul. 1, 2006, Best's Review. |
Grossman et al., Research Report, Insurance Risk Modeling Using Data Mining Technology, 10 pages, Mar. 31, 1998, IBM Research Division, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center. |
Etti Baranoff, Risk Management and Insurance, Book, 2004, 11 pages total, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/617,395 dated Jan. 26, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/617,395 dated Jun. 22, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/555,026 dated Mar. 8, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/555,043 dated Mar. 17, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/959,749 dated Mar. 31, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/617,426 dated Apr. 16, 2009. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/617,426 dated Nov. 17, 2008. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/617,395 dated Aug. 3, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/617,395 dated Nov. 24, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/555,043 dated Aug. 4, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/555,026 dated Aug. 3, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/959,749 dated Sep. 15, 2010. |
Office Action from Corresponding U.S. Appl. No. 11/952,474 dated Aug. 27, 2010. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60828593 | Oct 2006 | US |