I agree with you there, but if an insurance company is going to deny benefits for "risky behavior" then they should inform the subscribers up front and charge a higher premium. To take someone's money under false pretenses is BS.
I'd like to see the financial connections these "regulators" have personally with the affected insurance companies. I think I know what I'd find.
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.