[ SHOWGSD-L ] Interesting dog legislation in CT
- From: MASSTANA@xxxxxxx
- To: showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 11:38:54 EST
Thank you Holly.
John V.
The following was printed in the Hartford Courant this morning. Thought it
might be interesting for all dog people.
--Connecticut legislators are considering putting insurance companies on a
leash to help homeowners with dogs.
Dog owners have long been ticked off that many insurers deny homeowners or
renters policies to people with breeds reputed to be aggressive or vicious,
such
as pit bulls and Rottweilers.
In the past, bills banning breed discrimination have died quickly. But this
session, a close vote is shaping up on the insurance and real estate committee,
and the bill's champion, Rep. Robert W. Megna, D-New Haven, is seeking more
nods from fellow Democrats.
Unsure whether the bill has legs, Megna had the committee table it Tuesday
and will ask for a vote Thursday if he has enough support.
"It's so unfair to say you're not going to underwrite anyone who owns a
particular breed," Megna said.
Over the past decade, several insurers have created dog blacklists, singling
out a dozen or more breeds - from Akita to Great Dane - and many breed mixes.
The bill would ban such blacklists, but insurers still could choose customers
and charge premiums based on an individual dog's history of biting or
attacking, and on whether the dog caused any claims within the past three years.
Insurance lobbyists, however, are protesting the bill, saying it is
unworkable and would raise administrative costs by eliminating the current
method of
calculating Rover's risk.
Industry officials warn that all homeowners' premiums would rise if insurers
are prevented from minimizing their dog-bite claims. The claims are covered
under the liability portion of homeowners' policies.
Dogs bite more than 4.7 million Americans each year, and 800,000 victims get
medical care - about half of them children - the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention reports.
Home insurers paid an estimated $321.6 million on U.S. dog-bite liability
claims in 2003, according to the latest data available. That was down from
$345.5
million paid on about 20,800 claims in 2002, according to the industry's
Insurance Information Institute.
Statistics for Connecticut alone are not available. But Allstate, the largest
home insurer in the state, says it paid $849,000 on 35 dog-bite claims here
during the first half of 2004. The 35 included 10 involving German shepherds,
four involving pit bulls and one involving a beagle.
Insurers say they base their lists on their own claims data, media articles,
and information from animal organizations and the CDC, including
breed-by-breed statistics on fatal dog attacks.
Insurers' breed lists affect dog owners who buy a home for the first time or
move, or shop for a renter's policy to cover belongings. A dog owner also
could face the problem at renewal time if the insurer asks about breed, or if a
dog bite claim has been made during the year.
Lying about a dog on an application gives the insurer the right to cancel a
policy if the truth comes to light.
Although industry lobbyists insist the market for home insurance is
competitive, it is a tough market for consumers with blacklisted dogs. They
have fewer
insurers to choose from, and may end up with specialty insurers that charge
high premiums.
The Connecticut Insurance Department says it received about 35 complaints
last year about insurers' rejection of certain breeds.
Some, like Meriden police Sgt. Joyce Amann, have faced heart-rending
decisions.
A few years ago, when Amann and her husband were about to buy a house, an
insurance agent told her it would be uninsurable because of their two
Rottweilers, even though the dogs had never bitten anyone. The couple shopped
around but
had to accept coverage with a $5,000 deductible, costing nearly $2,000 a year,
from Lloyd's of London.
The policy was too expensive to keep, Amann said, so after about six months,
she gave the dogs to her parents, who live nearby, and got cheaper insurance.
"It ripped my heart out," Amann said.
In the last three months of 2004, five homeowners applied to the Connecticut
FAIR Plan - an insurer of last resort - because of dog problems. The plan
offers much narrower coverage than regular insurers - and won't cover dog bites
by
a dog that has already bitten someone.
Supporters of the bill acknowledge the potential for tragedy, but question
the fairness of tarring entire breeds.
"If we're not going to be profiling in our own society, why should we be
profiling with dogs?" said Rep. Diana Urban, R-North Stonington, a co-sponsor
of
the bill.
It's the deeds, not the breeds, that count, dog enthusiasts say. Besides,
they add, dogs such as the golden retriever that aren't blacklisted are also
known to attack.
"It's really the owners who cause irresponsible dogs, not the breed of dogs,"
said Lisa Peterson, a spokeswoman for the American Kennel Club. "If the dog
is well-behaved, there is no reason to deny or cancel insurance."
The kennel club has a "Canine Good Citizen" program used by some insurers,
including Nationwide, to accept a dog that would otherwise be rejected. The
program confers a certificate on a dog that has passed a 10-step test showing
it
is well-behaved and controllable.
Insurers should be allowed to weigh breed, just like "any legitimate risk
that distinguishes a particular applicant from another," said Robert Hartwig,
senior vice president and chief economist of the Insurance Information
Institute.
"The simple fact is that some [breeds] are more vicious than others."
Removing insurers' consideration of breed will mean customers with vicious
dogs will be subsidized by those who don't own them, Hartwig said.
Susan Giacalone, counsel to the Insurance Association of Connecticut, said
choosing a potentially dangerous dog is like choosing to buy a Corvette, which
would cost more to insure than a sedate sedan. "Everything you take on has some
consequence to it," she said.
Insurers are also facing bills banning breed bias in New York, New Jersey,
Maine and Vermont.
Although the Connecticut bill would let insurers evaluate each dog, "that
would be a tremendous burden," said Jay Jackson, a lobbyist for the Property
Casualty Insurance Association of America. "You're going to have to go out and
interview the dog."
Sen. Louis C. DeLuca, Senate Republican leader from Woodbury and an opponent
of the bill, joked that insurers may have to send out a "dog psychologist" if
it passes.
Dean Cawthra of Shelton, however, is cheering for the bill after an upsetting
episode in 2003. After 26 years as his insurance provider, Nationwide refused
to renew his policy unless he showed proof his two chow chows - who had never
bitten anyone - were surrendered to a shelter or destroyed, he said. He
dumped Nationwide instead.
"People are losing good pets; they're heartbroken," Cawthra said. "It's too
bad insurance companies have so much clout in the state of Connecticut. I hope
they don't this time."
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2005. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://www.showgsd.org
============================================================================
Other related posts:
- » [ SHOWGSD-L ] Interesting dog legislation in CT
