The first issue: fiduciary relationship, has to do with what the courts have held it to be, but also what advertising and marketing has held it to be, and people's own opinion of what they believe it to be. Now these are all different facets and they operate differently and independently of each other. The courts have their own ideas, but they don't agree. Many court cases, even in the same jurisdictions, don't have the same idea. A fiduciary relationship is founded upon a trust or confidence and relied upon by one party in the integrity and fidelity of another. So you would think that simple enough definition of trust and it having to do with the insurance company and the consumer, it would be plain and simple. But it isn't plain and simple, and the courts cannot agree. Some say there is no fiduciary relationship, other courts say there is. And back and forth; over and over, back and forth and no one seems to have the answer. The courts don't have the answer. So it really comes down to what we understand it to be.

Marketing has had a great impact. Back when insurance started, it was the responsibility of the policyholder to put forth the claim. That meant calculating, understanding and actually presenting a claim, so that the insurance company would respond and give consideration to that claim. As each generation proceeded we kind of did away with that idea. We didn't want to go through the trouble to understand that, and we wanted to be taken care of, especially through marketing and slogans that have us believe that we are on the same side, or we are a friendly neighbor, or in good hands..what have you. All of this leads to believe and have people expect, and really it isn't in keeping with the policy itself. However, lately now the policy has been changing. But this is the alarming part, at least to me, at least the way I see this.

© 1991-2016 APB