Can someone please explain the difference between carrier side vs policyholder side insurance coverage practice?
2
Attormey 1
Carrier side represents the insurer. In a nutshell they represent the company in its declination of claims and against bad faith claims.
Policyholder side represents the policyholder. They represent individuals or corporate clients in attempts to have claims for coverage paid out and potentially bringing bad faith claims against the insurer.
1
Attormey 1
Reinsurance can be a variety of things but generally in litigation it's insurers disputing claims. Insurance companies often reinsure large risks so that if they have to pay a claim they can recoup some or all of it from their own insurer. So they In essence become a policyholder themselves. Disputes to coverage arise in this context also.
It's more fun to rep policyholders cuz you have a little more leeway in how you can guide the matter. Insurers have guidelines you have to follow to a tee to get paid. Working for an insurer you also have to answer to a claims handler which sucks. They are often non practicing lawyers who think they know more than the attorney. It's a lot of red tape.
Plus representing the policyholder you get to go up against some of the biggest insurance companies in the world. It's an interesting dynamic. I represented policyholders for a decade and generally really enjoyed despite generally disliking litigation.
Carrier side represents the insurer. In a nutshell they represent the company in its declination of claims and against bad faith claims. Policyholder side represents the policyholder. They represent individuals or corporate clients in attempts to have claims for coverage paid out and potentially bringing bad faith claims against the insurer.
Reinsurance can be a variety of things but generally in litigation it's insurers disputing claims. Insurance companies often reinsure large risks so that if they have to pay a claim they can recoup some or all of it from their own insurer. So they In essence become a policyholder themselves. Disputes to coverage arise in this context also. It's more fun to rep policyholders cuz you have a little more leeway in how you can guide the matter. Insurers have guidelines you have to follow to a tee to get paid. Working for an insurer you also have to answer to a claims handler which sucks. They are often non practicing lawyers who think they know more than the attorney. It's a lot of red tape. Plus representing the policyholder you get to go up against some of the biggest insurance companies in the world. It's an interesting dynamic. I represented policyholders for a decade and generally really enjoyed despite generally disliking litigation.