What outcome can arise from placing risks with non-admitted insurers?

Placing risks with non-admitted insurers can lead to potential disputes over claims due to several factors inherent in this type of insurance arrangement. Non-admitted insurers are not licensed by state regulatory agencies, which often means they are not subject to the same oversight and regulations as admitted insurers. As a result, the policy terms may be less standardized, and there might be ambiguity in coverage, which can lead to differing interpretations when a claim is made.

When policyholders face a loss and seek compensation, the lack of regulatory oversight and standardized practices can contribute to disputes about whether a claim is covered, the extent of coverage, or the amount owed. Non-admitted insurers may also have different claims handling procedures compared to admitted insurers, which can further complicate the claims process.

In contrast to this, other outcomes, such as comprehensive coverage guarantees or faster processing of claims, are not typically associated with non-admitted insurers. While premiums might be higher due to the perceived risk in using non-admitted carriers, the key focus here is on the potential for disputes, making it the most appropriate choice in this context.