Who to call if your property was damaged by severe weather in Missouri
Missourians with questions about their policies or claims can contact the DCI's Consumer Hotline at 800-726-7390 or visit insurance.mo.gov for assistance.
DCI Director Angela Nelson emphasized the department's commitment to supporting consumers during this challenging time. 'If you have questions, we're here to help,' Nelson said. 'We want to be your first call if you need guidance on your coverage or options. After a storm, it's common for people to be approached by repair contractors or claim assistance services. It's crucial to verify their offers before entering any agreements.'
For those with property damage, the DCI recommends the following steps:
Contact Your Insurance Provider: Call your agent or the insurance company's toll-free claims number immediately. Depending on the damage, you may want to get estimates to help you decide whether to file a claim.
Make Temporary Repairs: If needed, make temporary repairs to prevent further damage. Keep receipts for any materials purchased, as these may be reimbursed.
Avoid Permanent Repairs: Do not make permanent repairs until your insurance company has inspected the damage. Doing so could result in your claim being denied.
Be Cautious with Contractors: Do not allow contractors to inspect your property unless you're present. Some contractors may intentionally damage property to inflate repair costs, which might not be covered by your insurance.
Verify Insurance Adjusters: An insurance adjuster should visit your property to assess the damage. Make sure they have proper identification. Keep in mind that adjusters will never ask for payment directly – this is part of the claims process.
Dispute Claims Handling: If you feel your insurer isn't handling your claim properly, you can file a complaint with DCI. The department will review whether the insurance company is following state regulations.
Once your claim is processed, it's advised to obtain repair estimates from trusted contractors or auto repair shops. Be cautious of solicitors offering repairs at discounted rates.
Be Wary of Upfront Payments: Avoid paying the full repair bill upfront. While some contractors require 50 percent of the total cost before beginning work, you should never pay the entire amount before the repairs are completed.
Additionally, some licensed 'public adjusters' may offer to represent you in negotiations with your insurer. These adjusters typically take a portion of your settlement as payment. While hiring a public adjuster isn't necessary to file a claim, it may be worth considering only if your insurer has made a settlement offer and you believe the adjuster's services could secure a higher payout than the additional cost.
The DCI oversees Missouri's insurance industry and other sectors, ensuring consumer protection through regulation and oversight. For more information about the department and its services, visit dci.mo.gov.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Aon faces lawsuit over alleged role in Vesttoo collapse
A civil lawsuit has been filed against insurance broker Aon, accusing the company of contributing to the downfall of the once billion-dollar-valued Israeli insurance start-up Vesttoo. Vesttoo ran a marketplace connecting insurers with investors for trading insurance-linked securities. Vesttoo filed for bankruptcy in 2023 after it was revealed that insurance policies sold on its platform were supported by allegedly fraudulent letters of credit. The suit, which was unsealed in Delaware bankruptcy court, alleges that Aon 'ignored red flags' and encouraged business partnerships despite internal doubts regarding Vesttoo's operations. The complaint, brought forward by trustee Lawrence Hirsh, who is tasked with recovering funds for Vesttoo's creditors, suggests that Aon's actions were instrumental in the start-up's collapse. The lawsuit centres on Aon's Collateral Protection Insurance (CPI) product, which was designed to insure lenders against losses if a borrower's asset liquidation failed to cover debts. According to the lawsuit, the product's success hinged on securing reinsurance, for which Aon allegedly depended heavily on Vesttoo's ability to attract capital market investors. The complaint also implicates other entities including China Construction Bank Corp. (CCB), whose former employee is accused of collaborating with Vesttoo insiders to generate fraudulent letters of credit. Aon's subsidiary, White Rock Insurance, had previously secured a temporary restraining order against Vesttoo and reported suspicions of fraudulent letters of credit to Bermuda's financial regulator in 2023. In response to the lawsuit, Aon has emphasised Vesttoo's own admission of executive-level fraud in an investigative report and has stated that the company's executives, along with other co-conspirators, deliberately sought to deceive Aon and other affected parties. Aon has responded to the allegations, describing the lawsuit as "a perverse attempt by Vesttoo's bankruptcy estate to shift responsibility for Vesttoo's deliberate fraud to Aon, one of the fraud's biggest victims. 'Vesttoo has already acknowledged in its own investigative report that executives of the company, along with other co-conspirators, were responsible for the fraud and intentionally sought to mislead Aon and other impacted parties. We will vigorously defend Aon against these meritless claims," reported the Financial Times. Representatives for CCB, which is also involved in a separate civil lawsuit filed by White Rock, have yet to comment on the current allegations. Court documents from CCB have previously described the implicated former employee as a "low-level" staff member in Hong Kong lacking the authority to issue the letters of credit in question. "Aon faces lawsuit over alleged role in Vesttoo collapse " was originally created and published by Life Insurance International, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Forbes
8 minutes ago
- Forbes
The Compliance Trap: What Most Platforms Get Backward
Revv CEO Adi Bathla is transforming auto repair with AI-powered tools for ADAS calibration, diagnostics and shop efficiency. An auto repair technician finishes calibrating a vehicle's safety sensors, only to spend another 20 to 60 minutes digging through manufacturer manuals to justify the work for insurance approval. Meanwhile, their competitor down the street uses a system that auto-generates that same documentation in real time as the calibration happens. It includes justification and a full audit trail, with every step already accounted for. One shop treats compliance like tedious homework. The other doesn't have to think about it. No matter what industry you're in, software companies have a lot to learn from compliance-heavy sectors (such as healthcare or finance) when it comes to designing systems where compliance is automatic, not manual—especially when it comes to building systems that reduce friction instead of adding it. Why Bolt-On Compliance Often Fails Many platforms, especially early-stage products, treat compliance like an afterthought—something to bolt on after building core functionality. This creates what we can call 'compliance tax': extra work that slows down operations without adding customer value. In contrast, the products that become indispensable within organizations take a different path. They don't scramble to add compliance features later or respond only when issues arise. Instead, compliance is baked into the architecture from day one. Without that foundational approach, any attempt to retrofit compliance later tends to face fundamental problems. A common challenge with compliance is that it's treated as a separate step from the actual work. Someone completes their primary task, only to have to go back and document it for regulatory purposes. Take an auto technician, for example: They perform a calibration, then manually fill out compliance records afterward. Similarly, in healthcare (before electronic health records became mandatory), a nurse might note a patient interaction on a physical chart, then log in to a separate system just to meet HIPAA documentation requirements. Operational data lives in one system while compliance data lives in another. When auditors come knocking, teams scramble to piece together evidence from multiple sources. We've seen auto body shops waste days' worth of time each year reconstructing or justifying decisions to insurers because their compliance tracking lives separate from their work records. People are people—they forget steps, skip documentation when busy and make data entry errors. Any compliance system that relies on human behavior to be perfect will eventually fail. The Native Compliance Advantage There's a concept in data privacy known as 'privacy by design,' which is exactly what it sounds like. A given technology platform is designed to keep users' information safe from the get-go with no thinking required on their part. All software platforms should be like that, whether we're talking about privacy compliance or making sure you're following an insurance organization's requirements for documentation. Therefore, instead of adding compliance to workflows, the platforms that are foundational to a customer's workflow are inherently compliant with what they need to be. When a doctor views a given patient's records, for instance, the system can automatically log who viewed what data and when, satisfying HIPAA requirements without extra clicks. Role-based permissions ensure only authorized staff see specific information types. Even if a CNA has access to the electronic health records system, it doesn't mean they need to see a patient's complete history or patients that they're not responsible for. Financial software takes the same approach. Transactions automatically generate regulatory reports as they occur. Anti-money laundering checks happen during payment processing, not as separate compliance reviews. Imagine trying to account for these details after the fact. It's simply not going to work. Building Compliance Architecture That Works There are technical foundations that make native compliance possible; first is database-level audit logging that captures every action automatically. When anyone touches anything, it should leave clear system records about who made the change, when it happened and what data changed. This leaves you with evidence suitable for most audits without requiring users to manually document their work. Second—role-based permissions that map to regulatory requirements, not just company policies. In healthcare platforms, for example, nurses might have access to patient vitals but not billing information. In auto repair software, technicians might view calibration specs, but only managers can finalize invoices. These technical choices reflect the larger playing field you're operating in. When you build with compliance in mind from the start, you're not only solving the immediate problem your platform addresses—you're also setting up long-term safeguards that matter downstream. The Choice Every Platform Must Make Managing compliance overhead and admin tasks can take a lot of valuable time away from your team. One study found that this sort of work can take up 20% of a given worker's time in a week. Ensuring native compliance lets users focus entirely on their actual work. In this way, compliance becomes invisible to users but bulletproof for auditors. Regardless of degree, every software company building for regulated industries faces this decision from the second they enter the market. They can either treat compliance like a feature to add or an architecture to build on. The companies choosing architecture over features are the ones better positioned to capture market share. Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Cybersecurity Insurance Market Forecast Report 2025-2030, with Case Studies of Securityscorecard, Bitsight, Country Mutual Insurance, Cyberark, Aon, and Chubb
Growth in the cybersecurity insurance market is driven by increasing cyberattacks and stringent data protection regulations making cyber insurance essential for businesses. High-profile breaches, AI-driven risk analytics, and the rapid shift to digital and remote work environments underscore the need for cyber insurance. Challenges like high premiums, lack of historical data, and policy complexity exist, but growth opportunities abound, especially in Asia Pacific, driven by digital transformation and rising cyber threats. Key players include BitSight, Mitratech, and AIG. Cybersecurity Insurance Market Dublin, Aug. 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The "Cybersecurity Insurance Market by Offering (Solutions, Services), Insurance Coverage (Data Breach, Cyber Liability), Insurance Type (Packaged, Standalone), Provider Type (Technology Providers, Insurance Providers) - Global Forecast to 2030" has been added to offering. The global cybersecurity insurance market is projected to expand significantly, with expected growth from USD 16.54 billion in 2025 to USD 32.19 billion by 2030, achieving a CAGR of 14.2%. The rise in cyberattacks' frequency and complexity necessitates businesses to safeguard against financial losses through insurance. Regulatory mandates, such as GDPR, are escalating the need for cybersecurity insurance as a compliance requisite. The integration of digital technologies, remote working, and cloud infrastructure broadens the cyberattack surface, amplifying the demand for robust coverage. Data breaches and associated legal costs have heightened cybersecurity insurance's strategic value. Insurers employing AI-driven risk analytics offer tailored policies, enhancing market attractiveness. Conversely, the market contends with challenges like inadequate actuarial data leading to pricing difficulties, claim frequency escalating premiums, policy complexities, and low SME adoption. Weak client cybersecurity practices contribute to higher loss ratios, deterring insurer involvement. Systemic risks from large-scale or state-sponsored cyberattacks threaten insurers' financial Segment Dominates Market OfferingsSolutions, involving analytics platforms, disaster recovery, business continuity, and cybersecurity solutions, dominate market offerings. Tailored for businesses, these solutions mitigate financial risks from breaches, ensuring coverage for privacy violations, IT forensics, regulatory matters, and more. Insurers provide real-time dashboards and cyber risk scores to evaluate and mitigate Breach Insurance Experiences Significant UptakeData breach insurance, offering critical financial coverage and response resources for breach incidents, presents high growth potential. Covering costs from legal fees to reputational management, it ensures compliance with GDPR, HIPAA, and CCPA. It addresses legal liabilities, forensic investigations, and business interruption losses, extending to ransomware and extortion scenarios, making it essential in today's cyber threat Pacific Leads in Market GrowthThe Asia Pacific region emerges as the fastest-growing market, driven by digital transformation across China, India, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Australia, coupled with increased ransomware attacks and data breaches. Heightened regulatory demands in these regions spearhead insurance adoption, particularly in BFSI, healthcare, and IT. Despite challenges such as low SME penetration and a lack of historical loss data, the market is ripe for sector-specific products and AI-enhanced markets like Singapore and Australia, backed by strong legal frameworks, lead in adoption. Increased regulatory penalties are projected to drive market demand further. Insurers can leverage partnerships with cybersecurity vendors to expand from Industry LeadersInterviews with industry leaders, including CEOs, directors, and system integrators, underscore market dynamics. Participants included: By Company: Tier I - 55%, Tier II - 30%, Tier III - 15% By Designation: C-Level Executives - 40%, Director Level - 25%, Others - 35% By Region: North America - 60%, Europe - 20%, Asia Pacific - 12%, Rest of the World - 8% Noteworthy market players include BitSight, Mitratech, RedSeal, SecurityScorecard, UpGuard, Travelers, AXA XL, AIG, Beazley, and Market AnalysisThe report provides extensive coverage of the cybersecurity insurance market, detailing size and growth potential across offerings, insurance coverage, type, provider, and region. It features in-depth competition analysis, vendor strategies, and report offers critical insights for market leaders and newcomers, enhancing competitive understanding and strategy formulation. It highlights primary market drivers, restrictions, opportunities, and challenges, aiding players in gauging industry Insights Include: Drivers: Regulatory boost, high financial recovery rates, increasing cyber threats Restraints: Awareness gaps, cost concerns Opportunities: AI and blockchain for analytics, widening coverage scopes Challenges: Cyber risk engagement, data privacy issues Thorough assessments cover emerging technologies, market developments, diversification strategies, and competitive profiles, facilitating informed decision-making within the industry landscape. Key Attributes: Report Attribute Details No. of Pages 345 Forecast Period 2025 - 2030 Estimated Market Value (USD) in 2025 $16.54 Billion Forecasted Market Value (USD) by 2030 $32.19 Billion Compound Annual Growth Rate 14.2% Regions Covered Global Key Topics Covered: Market Dynamics Drivers Surge in Mandatory Cybersecurity Regulations and Legislations to Boost Demand for Insurance Protection High Rate of Recovery of Financial Losses to Promote Cybersecurity Insurance Market Growth Increase in Frequency and Sophistication of Cyber Threats Restraints Lack of Awareness Related to Cybersecurity Insurance and Reluctance in Choosing Cybersecurity Insurance Over Cybersecurity Solutions Soaring Cybersecurity Insurance Costs Opportunities Exclusion of Cybersecurity Insurance Cover from Property and Casualty (P&C) Insurance Adoption of Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain Technology for Risk Analytics Challenges Cyber Insurers Grapple to Gain Traction Despite Soaring Cybersecurity Risks Data Privacy Concerns Lack of Understanding, Technical Knowledge, and Absence of Historical Cyber Data for Effective Underwriting Industry Trends Supply Chain Analysis Brief History of Cybersecurity Insurance Solutions Ecosystem Tools, Techniques, and Frameworks in Cybersecurity Insurance Market Current and Emerging Business Models Porter's Five Forces Model Key Stakeholders and Buying Criteria Technology Analysis Key Technologies Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Big Data Analytics Internet of Things Adjacent Technologies Blockchain Cloud Complementary Technologies Threat Intelligence Data Breach Response Security Monitoring & Analytics Future of Cybersecurity Insurance Market Landscape Short-Term Roadmap (2025-2026) Mid-Term Roadmap (2027-2028) Long-Term Roadmap (2029-2030) Trends/Disruptions Impacting Customer Business Best Practices in Cybersecurity Insurance Market Patent Analysis Pricing Model Analysis Use Cases Securityscorecard Helped Cyber Insurance Provider Better Understand Customer Risk European Financial Service Providers Leveraged Bitsight for Security Performance Management Country Mutual Insurance Company Leveraged Cyberark's Privileged Security Access Platform Global 500 Insurance Company Chose Prevalent's Third-Party Risk Management Solution Aon Secured Financial Institution's Funds and Data from Third-Party Cyber Risks Chubb's Cybersecurity Insurance Cover Assisted SME in Recovering Financial Losses Key Conferences and Events, 2025 Regulatory Bodies, Government Agencies, and Other Organizations General Data Protection Regulation Payment Card Industry-Data Security Standard Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Federal Information Security Management Act Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act Sarbanes-Oxley Act International Organization for Standardization 27001 Key Compliances in Cybersecurity Insurance Market Investment and Funding Scenario Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and Generative AI Impact of Generative AI on Cybersecurity Insurance Use Cases of Generative AI in Cybersecurity Insurance Future of Generative AI in Cybersecurity Insurance Impact of 2025 US Tariff - Cybersecurity Insurance Market Company Profiles Bitsight Mitratech Redseal Securityscorecard Upguard Cisco Microsoft Check Point Attackiq Sentinelone Broadcom Accenture Cylance Trellix Cyberark Cye Securit360 Founder Shield Chubb Axa Xl Aig Travelers Beazley Allianz Aon Arthur J. Gallagher Axis Capital CNA Fairfax Liberty Mutual Lloyd's of London Lockton Munich Re Sompo International At-Bay Cybernance Coalition Resilience Kovrr Sayata Labs Zeguro Ivanti Safebreach Orchestra Group For more information about this report visit About is the world's leading source for international market research reports and market data. We provide you with the latest data on international and regional markets, key industries, the top companies, new products and the latest trends. Attachment Cybersecurity Insurance Market CONTACT: CONTACT: Laura Wood,Senior Press Manager press@ For E.S.T Office Hours Call 1-917-300-0470 For U.S./ CAN Toll Free Call 1-800-526-8630 For GMT Office Hours Call +353-1-416-8900
