Woman has to switch insurance because of dog.
Brad Reinke opened a letter last month from an insurance underwriting specialist and learned he had seven months to find a new home for his family’s pit bulls or lose his home insurance.
“Due to a potential liability hazard, the aggressive dog should be removed from the premises,” the letter from Shelter Insurance Companies read. “No aggressive dog or aggressive breed of dog should replace this dog.”
Such ultimatums are not uncommon for home owners who have what insurance companies deem “dangerous dog” breeds.
Dog bites accounted for more than one-third of all homeowners insurance liability claims paid out in 2012, costing more than $489 million, according to the Insurance Information Institute (III). There were 16,459 dog bite claims last year. The average cost of settling those claims was $29,752.
Reinke believes his insurance agency jumped to conclusions about his pit bull, however, based on what an underwriter saw through a window and what she heard: barking.
“We’ve been here for five of the seven years that we’ve had this company insure our house,” said Reinke, a highway technician at the Indiana Department of Transportation. “I don’t see how they can say they’re aggressive when they’ve never met the dogs. This is pretty much discriminating against the breed, pretty much stereotyping the breed through the window.”
Insurance agency officials don’t disagree there is a bias, but say that’s based on past experience.
Insurance 'has rules'
When Reinke’s mother, Jana, a co-signer on her son’s mortgage, visited Shelter Insurance agent Joshua Aber in Muncie, she accused him of being discriminatory toward pit bulls. “Yes, I am,” she quoted him as saying. “That’s exactly what he said.”
Aber told The Star Press that excluding aggressive breeds of dogs from homeowners coverage is common in the insurance industry, and has been for decades.
“If anyone in town knows you have a pit bull, no one is going to insure it unless you have a separate liability policy that you can buy for those breeds,” Aber said. “I don’t sell it.”
Andy Woodward, Sheriff's Deputy, Loses Homeowners Insurance Because He Cares For A Police Dog
Dogs may be a man's best friend - but not necessarily when that man is a sheriff's deputy in Nebraska.
Last week, American Family Insurance informed Douglas County Sheriff's Deputy Andy Woodward that his homeowners insurance would be terminated because he takes care of a police dog.
The county initially argued American Family was barking up the wrong tree -- all its police dogs are insured by a separate policy, and according to the Omaha World-Herald, Woodward has to live with the police dog as part of his job.
Despite these arguments, Woodward received a letter shortly after an insurance company worker visited the deputy's home. It read, "Due to the additional liability exposure of your police dog, we are unable to continue your homeowner coverage."
American Family says that its decision rests on its belief that the pooch, Diezel, counts as an attack dog. Diezel is a Belgian Malinois and doesn't qualify as one of the company's "prohibited breeds" (pit bulls, Rottweilers, etc.), but the company believes his high degree of defense training increases the likelihood he could bite someone.
"We regret this situation occurred," added American Family spokesman Steve Witmer in an emailed statement to The Huffington Post. "American Family Insurance supports law enforcement and pet owners. Mr. Woodward was a long-time customer of American Family Insurance, and we wanted to continue that relationship."
"With the appropriate information regarding Douglas County’s liability insurance coverage, we would have and will renew coverage. We care about Mr. Woodward and all law enforcement officers and are working to resolve this matter going forward."
American Family estimates around 2 percent of the U.S. population suffers a dog bite every year, or about 4.7 million people.
"It's a big issue. Dog bites, or dog attacks, are the largest single cause of homeowners' claims since the 1990s," explained an American Family spokesman to Consumerist.
PHOTO of Woodward and Diezel:
Insurance companies are evil.
Good for her for not buying into that bullshit and switching insurance companies.
She makes a good point towards the end of the video.
I'll post more later. I found pages of stories about this. 
I don't get the outrage. Its a business decision based on actuarial science and she had 7 months to get a new policy.
Judo Scott - I don't get the outrage. Its a business decision based on greed.
fixed
Judo Scott - I don't get the outrage. Its a business decision based on actuarial science and she had 7 months to get a new policy.
Bro where is my discount for my security system known as a dog? Is it not true that dogs deter crime? How come I don't receive a discount for that security from the insurance companies? Why cause it doesn't benefit the insurance company when it comes to making profits.
Isaac298 -Wouldn't the insurance company stand to profit by not having to pay out theft claims because your dog acted as a theft deterrent?Judo Scott - I don't get the outrage. Its a business decision based on actuarial science and she had 7 months to get a new policy.
Bro where is my discount for my security system known as a dog? Is it not true that dogs deter crime? How come I don't receive a discount for that security from the insurance companies? Why cause it doesn't benefit the insurance company when it comes to making profits.
No. Because the costs of dog bite claims far outweigh the savings provided by the theft deterrent benefits a dog provides.
Don't like it? Buy a different policy.
Mark
I moved to a new house in July or 2012. I have a Doberman.
Here is a list of people that wouldnt insure me bc of her:
Allstate
State Farm
Progressive
I ended up getting the best deal and a great agent with Country Companies. I will agree with her that turning people down for the breed of dog they have is a bit silly. But you know how those APBT owners are.... ;)
Isaac298 -Judo Scott - I don't get the outrage. Its a business decision based on actuarial science and she had 7 months to get a new policy.
Bro where is my discount for my security system known as a dog? Is it not true that dogs deter crime? How come I don't receive a discount for that security from the insurance companies? Why cause it doesn't benefit the insurance company when it comes to making profits.
My golden retriever barks at everything. That deters break ins. Having a known dangerous breed doesn't do shit. A robber isnt figuring our what type of fog is barking they just know the homeowner has been alerted
my wife and 3 other couples are renting a mountain house for the weekend
the one and only couple tha tinsists on tkaing their stupid dog everywhere is complaining about the $200 "pet fee" that they need to pay
the owner of the place doesnt even normally allow dogs in his home but made an exception as long as the fee was paid
many dog owners simply cannot fathom that dogs are generally a nuisance or inconvenience to society, in general...they are shocked to learn that there ar epeople out there that don't like having dog hair on their furniture or when a dog "kisses" you on the face
I had this happen to me too. I've owned rotties since 2000. Just shop around and you can find other insurance, at least I did. The insurance should be more afraid of my wife driving through the house when trying to park the SUV than one of my dogs getting loose and attacking someone (who doesn't deserve it). But whatever, I'll give my money to someone else
Most policies exclude the dog bite claim now anyway. So if you want to own a biter then you self insure the risk.
angryinch -Judo Scott - I don't get the outrage. Its a business decision based on greed.
fixed
A business making decisions based upon financial implications??? Can you imagine?
As a dog trainer and former owner of an APBT there is no bigger advocate for the breed on the OG than me. However, the breed has a disproportionate number of irresponsible owners compared to other breeds.
Also, it's hard to complain about insurance companies discriminating against the breed when media and the humane oriented groups do such a tremendous job of falsely labeling the pit bull as inherently vicious.