Cybercriminals exploiting COVID-19 to spread their brand of viruses; Members of Congress Urge Insurers to Cover COVID Business Interruptions; List of Insurance Agents, List of Loan Officers and List of Financial Planners

Insurance News for 3/20/2020

Cybercriminals exploiting COVID-19 to spread their brand of viruses

The mounting threat of COVID-19 has placed the healthcare system of many nations under a huge amount of pressure, and cybercriminals could be exploiting this to spread viruses - but instead of biological ones, these are computer viruses.

According to a study by US-based cyber insurance start-up Corvus, cybercriminals are increasingly turning to the health sector for targets. In January 2020, four healthcare entities reported attacks – the most in any quarter since 2017. Corvus predicted a rapid increase of 12 for the full quarter. In 2019, healthcare entities were targeted for a ransomware attack more than 24 times, and it seems that the frequency is only going to continue increasing.

Phishing is the most common method used in order to gain entry into healthcare entities’ systems, accounting for 91% of cases, according to the study.

“We know that phishing is the most common attack vector for ransomware and other malware attacks,” Mike Karbassi (pictured)

, head of cyber underwriting at Corvus, told Corporate Risk and Insurance.

“With the accelerating outbreak of coronavirus, criminals hope to leverage the confusion and desire for official information to make their favored tactic even more effective. Security researchers have uncovered examples of phishing emails purporting to be from the Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization, attempting to get victims to download a PDF or click a link that supposedly contains important information about the virus.”

Additionally, many healthcare entities’ cyber defences are inadequate, the study found. While better than the average, over 75% of hospitals do not use email scanning and filtering tools, according to Corvus. Furthermore, individual health practitioners, such as physicians or dentists, are far less likely to use email authentication - they are 14% less likely than average to use this basic form of cyber defense.

Data showed that use of such tools can reduce attacks by 33% the likelihood of being a victim of a ransomware event. Hospitals are also six times more likely to be internally hosted compared to other healthcare institutions – this places responsibility for maintaining security in-house.

The COVID-19 outbreak has also made it a must for many workers to begin working from home. According to Karbassi, working remotely presents another opportunity for cybercriminals to gain entry into vital networks.

“Businesses also need to consider the security risk involved with remote work,” he said.
“Attackers will seek any soft spots they can find, and businesses rushing to implement a fully-scaled remote work infrastructure, like a VPN or remote desktop environment, could cut corners. Like any part of the IT ‘stack’, these technologies can be complex to set up and roll out to individual users with proper training.”

Karbassi mentioned several technical aspects that risk and IT managers must take into consideration.

“Will a company rushing to equip its workforce properly configure its VPN to replicate the security of its in-office perimeter network?” he asked.
“Will its employees find ‘shadow IT’ workarounds because of the difficulty of using certain systems, giving criminals an easy opportunity to access sensitive data?"

“Consider also how a worker outside of the office could expose data in a more physical sense, like revealing passwords to someone looking over their shoulder at a coffee shop or divulging information verbally while on the phone when they think they are alone. These factors all exist today for any business that has employees on the road traveling, but you can multiply the risk in a fully-remote scenario.”

Source: Corporate Risk and Insurance 3/19/20 Author: Gabriel Olano

Members of Congress Urge Insurers to Cover COVID Business Interruptions

Bipartisan group of U.S. House members has asked insurers to retroactively recognize financial losses relating to COVID-19 under commercial business interruption coverage for policyholders.

Eighteen House members made their case in a March 18 letter addressed to the leaders of the American Property Casualty Insurance Association, the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America, and the Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers.

In response, the four industry groups said they’re working to provide relief to policyholders but not through the coverage in question.

“During times of crisis, we must all work together,” the letter from the congressional representatives states.
“We urge you to work with your member companies and brokers to recognize financial loss due to COVID-19 as part of policyholders’ business interruption coverage.”

The House members add that they

“stand ready and willing to work with you on any future measures that might be necessary to see our country through this trying time.”

Those signing the letters include the following House Democrats: Nydia Velazquez, N.Y.; Andy Kim, N.J. (note: self-quarantined due to contact with someone positive); Grace Napolitano, Calif.; Marc Veasey, Texas; Alcee Hastings, Fla.; Rashida Tlaib, Mich.; Gilbert Cisneros, Calif.; Scott Peters, Calif.; Max Rose, N.Y.; Kathleen Rice, N.Y.; Joe Cunningham, S.C.; and Andy Levin, Mich.

The following Republican House members also signed the letter: Brian Fitzpatrick, Pa.; Jim Hagedorn, Minn.; French Hill, Ark.; Rick Crawford, Ark.; Steve Womack, Ark; and Bruce Westerman, Ark.

The letter makes the case that American businesses are “understandably concerned about the potential financial impact the continued global spread of COVID-19 may have on their operations” in the wake of more than 118,000 declared cases of the disease in 114 countries globally, with more than 4,000 people having lost their lives so far. As a result, they argue that including COVID-19 related losses in business interruption coverage is key.

“In many commercial property insurance policies, business interruption coverage is triggered when the policyholder sustains ‘direct physical loss of or damage to’ insured property,” the letter notes.
“In addition, many commercial property insurance policies provide coverage for business income losses sustained when a civil authority prohibits or impairs access to the policyholder’s premises.”

The members of Congress argue that shelter-in-place orders alone relating to the COVID-19 crisis, such as the one in place for the greater San Francisco Bay Area since March 16 and another under consideration for New York City, should be among the situations counted under that policy language.

“These ‘shelter-in-place’ orders and curfews—combined with those individuals who have already chosen to stay in their home over fear of contracting the virus—will no doubt have an economic impact on America’s businesses, particularly its small businesses,” the letter argues.
“Many of us have already been hearing from constituent businesses who have been forced to send employees home or shutter their doors due to a loss of economic activity.”

David Sampson, president and chief executive officer of the APCIA, Charles Chamness, president and CEO of NAMIC, Bob Rusbuldt, president and CEO of IIABA and Ken Crerar, president and CEO of CIAB, sent a joint letter to Rep. Velazquez, D-NY, the first signatory and chair of the House Committee on Small Business, in response.

“Standard commercial insurance policies offer coverage and protection against a wide range of risks and threats and are vetted and approved by state regulators. Business interruption policies do not, and were not designed to, provide coverage against communicable diseases such as COVID-19,” they wrote.

“The U.S. insurance industry remains committed to our consumers and will ensure that prompt payments are made in instances where coverage exists,” they added.

In their response, the trade group leaders noted that member insurers have been active in charitable efforts in their communities and have begun working with customers to offer flexibility on premium payments.

“We recognize the extraordinary challenges our country is facing—our member businesses, our employees, and our families are confronting the same trials,” the trade group letter said

,concluding, however, that government action is needed to address growing problems.

“The U.S. is in the midst of a national crisis that will require federal assistance that provides funding directly to those American individuals and businesses most in need. Our organizations stand ready to work with Congress on solutions that provide the necessary relief as soon as possible,” the letter said.

Separately, Rep. Velazquez introduced legislation to provide other relief for small businesses during the COVID-19 outbreak. The COVID-19 Relief for Small Businesses Act of 2020 would provide zero-interest direct loans to small businesses, direct grants, loan debt relief and would seek to increase access to federal contracting opportunities, among other provisions.

In addition to responding to the letter from Congress, NAMIC worked to oppose legislation proposed in the state of New Jersey that also sought to retroactively cover small businesses for COVID-related interruptions—specifically any business with less than 100 employees in New Jersey with a policy of business interruption insurance in force on March 9, 2020, regardless of whether the policy had a virus exclusion. NAMIC offered a statement strongly opposing N.J. Assembly Bill 3844.

“The proposed retroactive application legislation would fundamentally change the agreed upon transfer of prospective risk of loss exposure to coverage for a known and presently occurring loss, something the parties did not agree to, the insurer did not rate for, and the policyholder did not pay for", wrote NAMIC Northeast Regional Vice President Christopher Stark.

Stark also pointed out the potential unintended consequence of delaying Small Business Administration loans, as the SBA will likely ask applicants to disclose insurance payments before receiving funds.

Elsewhere, financial analysts have expressed uncertainty about how coverage questions in this areas will play out. “There may be exclusions, but there may very well be different interpretations around those exclusions in the U.S. and elsewhere,” said Stephan Holzberger, chief rating officer of AM Best, announcing an upcoming pandemic stress test for rated companies earlier this week.

A seemingly more damaging assessment for commercial insurers came from the chief executive of an InsurTech, Chris Cheatham of RiskGenius. In a new publication, Cheatham described the possibility that the absence of language explicitly covering communicable disease claims or exclusion clauses in commercial insurance policies will put more carriers on the hook to cover business interruption and other claims. In fact, RiskGenius estimates that roughly 80 percent of commercial insurance policies are “silent” or vulnerable on communicable disease coverage.

In a post on the RiskGenius Insurance Prospectus blog, Cheatham notes that while many attorneys believe other provisions in a Silent COVID policy would exclude coverage, such as the need for physical damage to trigger coverage, his team believes this issue may arise in claims and litigation.

“While insurance experts would be correct in asserting that insurance policies silent on communicable diseases traditionally do not cover communicable disease losses, we are focused on what may occur with unexpected court rulings or new laws and regulations,” he wrote in an email newsletter about the blog item.
(See related article, “How Silence May Impact Commercial Insurers on COVID Cover“)

In a separate development, a restaurant (Oceana Grill) filed the first lawsuit on a business interruption coverage matter in a civil district court in New Orleans Monday, asking a state judge for a declaratory judgment that its all-risks policy from Lloyd’s of London will cover its damages if ordered to close by civil authorities in response to the coronavirus.


Source: Carrier Management 3/20/20 Editorial


List of Insurance Agents, List of Loan Officers and List of Financial Planners



  • 99% good email addresses
  • Lists are literally updated daily
  • Guidance offered on effective email sending


-California only list 186,169 Records
-Florida only list 70,126 Records
-Texas only list 30,728 Records
-Illinois only list 11,640 Records
-Maryland only list 33,666 Records
-Massachusetts only list 16,339 Records
-Georgia only list 49,263 Records
-Wisconsin only list 24,647 Records

NATIONAL LIST 777,455 Records
100% of the records have email addresses

·         Records available in all states-Call or reply for record counts and pricing.



100% of the records have email addresses

RELIABILITY-99% deliverability/good email addresses.

QUALITY EMAIL SERVICES AVAILABLE-Achieve a high inbox placement at a value price.

Lists available for Mortgage Loan Officers and Financial Planners

610,218 Mortgage Loan Officer Records
295,074 Financial Planner Records

Contact Us/Order Samples

For any questions OR a sample of the records please submit the following form.

Submit your comments, questions, or requests below. If you include your phone number, we will call you back.


I am Interested In: