Was State Farm not a good neighbor when it came to dealing with the multitude of Hurricane Katrina losses in Mississippi? Did this dispute really have to end up in court? Or should the carrier have been more proactive and flexible in adjusting claims where the source of damage wasn't clear?

I've heard grumbling within the industry that State Farm practically invited legal challenges and public scorn by the way it stiff-armed many claimants with wind-driven water damage. The result was another body blow to the industry's already tarnished reputation, prompting retaliation by angry state and federal lawmakers.

I got an earful from one industry official in an e-mail about State Farm's Katrina settlement (still a work in progress, with the judge rejecting the first agreement). This savvy individual complained about how much better insurers could have handled disputed claims--perhaps not only avoiding the lawsuits and horrible publicity that followed, but setting the stage for improved relations with regulators and the public.

Recommended For You

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader

Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:

  • Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
  • Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
  • Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
  • Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.