|
Beware of persons claiming that their "bond" is the same as insurance. In most cases the bond referred to is a statutory license bond, not a fidelity bond and offers little protection to the client. Obviously, too, there is little similarity between any bond and insurance.
Most carriers compute premiums based on a percentage of payroll. In the past I have seen policies which computed premiums based on overall sales. There were serious deficiencies in all of these policies with sales-based premiums. I do not mean to imply that there may not be quality coverage available where premiums are figured this way. I'm just saying I've never seen one. I would recommend that if you run across one of these policies, that you scrutinize the policy with a critical eye.
As noted above, the standard method of computing premiums seems to be by percentage of payroll. It's sometimes a good idea to determine what percent of payroll is being charged for coverage. (Being insurance companies, however, they apparently feel the responsibility to even confuse this simple computation. Instead of saying, for instance, 4% of payroll [$4 per $100 of payroll] they tend to say $40 per $1,000 of payroll.)
It used to be that if you were to review four comparable policies and discovered that three were around 3% while the other was 8%, you would have an indication of a claim history which might merit further explanation on the part of the last company. However, today's insurance market is somewhat bizarre and this test has limited validity. I do think, however, that security companies which seem to be paying more than the competition for identical coverage should be questioned concerning their claims history and safety record.
In addition to liability insurance, the security company should provide proof of workers' compensation coverage with statutory limits, if applicable, or with limits appropriate for the venue.
____________________________
|
|
