Systems and methods for selecting proper clause for document

An insurance company issues a property policy to a customer for property encumbered with an obligation to a creditor. The policy is to be issued to include an encumbrance clause as specified by the creditor. An identification of the creditor is provided to a clause database owned and maintained by a third party agent of the insurance company. The clause database determines that the identified creditor has an entry therein, retrieves from the entry the encumbrance clause as specified by the creditor, and returns the retrieved clause, which is received and inserted into the policy to be issued.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION(S)

The present application is filed concurrently with and shares a common title and disclosure with the following applications, each of which is hereby incorporated herein by reference in its entirety:U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/105,371; andU.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/105,377.

FIELD

The present disclosure is directed to systems and methods that effectuate placement of an appropriate clause in a document. More particularly, the present disclosure is directed to such systems and methods that are applied to the context of an insurance policy, and specifically selecting an appropriate mortgage clause to be inserted into the insurance policy.

BACKGROUND

In a highly automated operation such as a large insurance company, documents are often issued as a combination of common text and inserted text. As may be understood, the common text is common to all forms of the issued document, while the inserted text varies in each form of the issued document according to factors relating to the particular circumstances of the issuance of each particular document.

For example, when issuing an insurance policy in connection with property, it is often the case that the property is or is to be encumbered with a mortgage or another obligation in connection with which the property has been pledged to secure the obligation. In such a case, the mortgagee oftentimes requires insertion of particular text into the issued insurance policy as a mortgage clause or the like, usually in a declarations page of the issued policy. As should be understood, the mortgage clause essentially states that the mortgagee is in fact a mortgagee with respect to the property and therefore has certain rights under the terms of the issued policy with respect to the property. In particular, the mortgage clause may have the correct legal name of the mortgagee, a designation that the mortgagee should be construed to include successors and/or assignees, a correct legal address of the mortgagee, an identification of the mortgage, and/or the like. Note here that such information may also be employed to directly bill the mortgagee for the cost of the policy or otherwise notify the mortgagee regarding the policy, if in fact such an arrangement has been made.

As should be understood, the insurance company issuing such a policy with such a mortgage clause with respect to the particular mortgagee may in fact issue many such policies with such mortgage clause with respect to the particular mortgagee, as well as many other policies with other mortgage clauses, each with respect to one of a number of particular mortgagee. Accordingly, it is known that the insurance company may maintain a mortgage clause database with multiple mortgage clauses, each for a particular mortgagee. With such a mortgage clause database, then, issuance of a policy for a particular piece of property with a mortgage thereon only requires identifying the mortgagee for such piece of property. Based on the identification, then, the insurance company does not necessarily contact the identified mortgagee, but instead refers to the mortgage clause database to determine whether the identified mortgagee has an entry therein. If so, a pre-defined mortgage clause for the mortgagee is retrieved from the entry and appropriately inserted as inserted text into the policy issued for the piece of property, and such clause may also be employed to directly bill the mortgagee for the cost of the policy or otherwise notify the mortgagee regarding the policy.

Note, though, that such a mortgage clause database of an insurance company is only useful to the insurance company if the clauses therein are correct. Thus, if the database contains an outdated clause, perhaps because the corresponding mortgagee has changed the corporate form thereof or the address thereof, then use of the outdated clause will eventually be noted by the mortgagee or an agent thereof, which in turn will require that the clause be corrected. As should be understood, such correction requires considerable time and effort, both in human terms and in terms of paperwork, postage, filing, and the like.

Note too that it may be the case that a particular mortgagee has multiple entries in the database, or that multiple entries in the database are ambiguous and may apply to the particular mortgagee. For example, it may be that a second entry was created for the particular mortgagee without deleting a first entry therefore, or it may be that one entry lists the mortgagee as a corporation while another entry lists the mortgagee as a partnership. In fact, it may be that the particular mortgagee has entries for each of several jurisdictions. In any case, and again, if the clause from the wrong entry is used, the wrong clause will eventually be noted by the mortgagee or an agent thereof, which in turn will require that the clause be corrected. Again, such correction requires considerable time and effort, both in human terms and in terms of paperwork, postage, filing, and the like.

Accordingly, a need exists for systems and methods for selecting the correct clause for a document, and specifically the correct mortgage clause to be inserted into an insurance policy. More particularly, a need exists for such systems and methods that select such correct clause from a database that is better maintained than the mortgage clause database as maintained by an insurance company. Even more particularly, a need exists for such systems and methods that select such correct clause from a mortgage clause database maintained by a third party that is better equipped to maintain same.

SUMMARY

The aforementioned needs are satisfied at least in part by a system and method performed by an insurance company for issuing a property policy of the insurance company to a customer for property of the customer. The property is encumbered with an obligation to a creditor in connection with which the property is pledged to secure the obligation, and the policy is to be issued to include an encumbrance clause as specified by the creditor.

In one embodiment, an identification of the creditor is provided to a clause database owned and maintained by a third party agent of the insurance company. The clause database determines that the identified creditor has an entry therein, retrieves from the entry the encumbrance clause as specified by the creditor, and returns the retrieved clause. The retrieved clause for the identified creditor is received from the clause database and inserted into the policy to be issued, and the policy is issued with the inserted encumbrance clause for the identified creditor to the customer. The third party agent of the insurance company is better able than the insurance company to maintain and keep current the clause database.

In another embodiment, contact information is received for an entity that is to select the encumbrance clause, and the policy is preliminarily issued to the customer without any encumbrance clause therein. Thereafter, a message is sent to the selecting entity by way of the received contact information. The message as sent to and received by the selecting entity directs same to a clause database where the selecting entity selects therefrom an entry having the encumbrance clause for the policy as specified by the creditor. The selected clause for the creditor is received from the clause database, the preliminarily issued policy is amended to include the received clause for the creditor, and the amended policy is subsequently issued with the included clause for the creditor to the customer.

In a variation of the another embodiment, the selecting entity is a settlement officer conducting a settlement in connection with the property who creates an entry in the clause database having an encumbrance clause for the policy for the creditor. The preliminarily issued policy is firstly amended to include the received clause for the creditor and the firstly amended policy is subsequently issued with the included clause for the creditor to the customer, and information is received from the creditor that the received clause in the firstly amended clause is incorrect. Thereafter, the firstly amended policy is secondly amended to include a corrected clause for the policy as specified by the creditor and the secondly amended policy is subsequently issued with the corrected clause as specified by the creditor to the customer. Here, the settlement officer created the encumbrance clause with supposedly correct information that was actually wrong but could not allow settlement to proceed without issuance of a policy for the property with the supposedly correct but actually wrong information.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Example Computing Environment

FIG. 1is set forth herein as an exemplary computing environment in which various embodiments of the present innovation may be implemented. The computing system environment is only one example of a suitable computing environment and is not intended to suggest any limitation as to the scope of use or functionality. Numerous other general purpose or special purpose computing system environments or configurations may be used. Examples of well-known computing systems, environments, and/or configurations that may be suitable for use include, but are not limited to, personal computers (PCs), server computers, handheld or laptop devices, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based systems, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, embedded systems, distributed computing environments that include any of the above systems or devices, and the like.

With reference toFIG. 1, an exemplary system for implementing aspects described herein includes a computing device, such as computing device100. In its most basic configuration, computing device100typically includes at least one processing unit102and memory104. Depending on the exact configuration and type of computing device, memory104may be volatile (such as random access memory (RAM)), non-volatile (such as read-only memory (ROM), flash memory, etc.), or some combination of the two. This most basic configuration is illustrated inFIG. 1by dashed line106. Computing device100may have additional features/functionality. For example, computing device100may include additional storage (removable and/or non-removable) including, but not limited to, magnetic or optical disks or tape. Such additional storage is illustrated inFIG. 1by removable storage108and non-removable storage110.

Computing device100typically includes or is provided with a variety of computer-readable media. Computer readable media can be any available media that can be accessed by computing device100and includes both volatile and non-volatile media, removable and non-removable media. By way of example, and not limitation, computer readable media may comprise computer storage media and communication media.

Computing device100may also have input device(s)114such as keyboard, mouse, pen, voice input device, touch input device, etc. Output device(s)116such as a display, speakers, printer, etc. may also be included. All these devices are generally known to the relevant public and therefore need not be discussed in any detail herein except as provided.

Notably, computing device100may be one of a plurality of computing devices100inter-connected by a network118, as is shown inFIG. 1. As may be appreciated, the network118may be any appropriate network, each computing device100may be connected thereto by way of a connection112in any appropriate manner, and each computing device100may communicate with one or more of the other computing devices100in the network118in any appropriate manner. For example, the network118may be a wired or wireless network within an organization or home or the like, and may include a direct or indirect coupling to an external network such as the Internet or the like.

In the case of program code execution on programmable computers, the computing device generally includes a processor, a storage medium readable by the processor (including volatile and non-volatile memory and/or storage elements), at least one input device, and at least one output device. One or more programs may implement or utilize the processes described in connection with the presently disclosed subject matter, e.g., through the use of an application-program interface (API), reusable controls, or the like. Such programs may be implemented in a high-level procedural or object-oriented programming language to communicate with a computer system. However, the program(s) can be implemented in assembly or machine language, if desired. In any case, the language may be a compiled or interpreted language, and combined with hardware implementations.

Selecting a Mortgage Clause for an Insurance Policy

Turning now toFIG. 2, it is seen that an insurance company10may issue a number of policies12, such as for example property insurance policies12, where each policy12is memorialized as a document that includes common text and inserted text. As may be understood, the common text is common to all forms of the issued document, while the inserted text varies in each form of the issued document according to factors relating to the particular circumstances of the issuance of each particular document. For example, common text may include standard exclusion clauses, while inserted text may include clauses that vary based on jurisdiction, the named insured, the type of property being insured, etc.

One notable piece of inserted text is a mortgage or encumbrance clause14or the like that may be required. Specifically, if the property is encumbered with a mortgage or another obligation in connection with which the property has been pledged to secure the obligation, then the mortgagee16may require that particular text be inserted into the issued insurance policy12as a mortgage clause14, usually in a declarations page of the issued policy12. As should be understood, the mortgagee16is the creditor or lender in a mortgage agreement in connection with the property, and thus receives periodic payments in connection with such mortgage agreement from a corresponding mortgagor that presumably requested the policy12from the insurance company10.

As was set forth above, the mortgage clause14required by the mortgagee16essentially states that the mortgagee16is in fact a mortgagee with respect to the property and therefore has certain rights under the terms of the issued policy12with respect to the property. In particular, the mortgage clause14may have the correct legal name of the mortgagee16, a designation that the mortgagee16should be construed to include successors and/or assignees, a correct legal address of the mortgagee16, an identification of the mortgage, and/or the like. Note here that the identification of the mortgage will of course vary from policy12to policy12. Note too that the information in a particular mortgage clause14as finalized in a particular policy12may also be employed to directly bill the mortgagee16for the cost of the policy12, if in fact such an arrangement has been made, or otherwise notify the mortgagee16regarding the policy12.

Especially if particular mortgagees16are repeatedly referenced in the mortgage clauses14of policies12issued by a particular insurance company10, the particular insurance company10may refer to a mortgage clause database18to obtain a particular mortgage clause14corresponding to a particular mortgagee16. As was set forth above, such a mortgage clause database18would have therein multiple mortgage clauses14, each for a particular mortgagee16. Thus, and as seen inFIG. 3, issuance of a policy12by the particular insurance company10for a piece of property would include identifying the particular mortgagee16for such piece of property (301). Based on the identification, then, the insurance company10need not necessarily contact the identified mortgagee16, but instead would refer to the mortgage clause database18to determine whether the identified mortgagee16has an appropriate entry therein (303). If so (305), the entry is selected (307) and a pre-defined mortgage clause14for the identified mortgagee16is retrieved from the selected entry (309) and appropriately inserted as inserted text into the policy12issued for the piece of property (311). Additionally, such retrieved clause14may also be employed to directly bill the mortgagee16for the cost of the policy12or otherwise notify the mortgagee16regarding the policy12(313).

In the prior art, and as was noted above, the mortgage clause database18was owned and maintained by the particular insurance company10, and maintenance of such database18was perhaps not as thorough as possible. Thus, errors could accumulate in the database18in the form of entries that were out of date, multiple entries for the same mortgagee16without any distinguishing indicia, entries with information that was no longer correct, and the like. As may be appreciated, an entry would become incorrect or out of date if the information incumbent therein changed over the course of time, perhaps due to a change in the name, address, or legal form of the mortgagee16, or the like. Similarly, multiple entries could arise if a second entry was created for a particular mortgagee16without deleting a first entry therefore, or if the mortgagee16specifies different mortgage clauses14for different jurisdictions, policy owners, or the like.

As a result, an operator selecting an entry as at307could select an entry with incorrect information, or be forced to choose incorrectly from among several entries for the mortgagee16. In any case, use of an incorrect clause14will eventually be noted by the mortgagee16or an agent thereof, which in turn will require that the clause14be corrected. As should be understood, such correction requires considerable time and effort, both in human terms and in terms of paperwork, postage, filing, and the like. For example, such correction may require a telephone conversation with a policy agent or service representative or the like, after which the policy12is reissued and mailed with the corrected mortgage clause14. While a single correction transaction may be insignificant, the correction may be required in thousands of policies12, each of which would require a corresponding correction transaction.

Selecting Mortgage Clause from Third Party Database

It is to be appreciated that many mortgagees16employ third party vendors as tracking agents20to assist in tracking notifications and billings with respect to the insurance company10. As should be understood, each tracking agent20acts as an agent for a mortgagee16and among other things verifies for that mortgagee16that policies12from the insurance company12with respect to the mortgagee16are correctly issued. Thus, among other things, such a tracking agent20ensures that each such policy12includes minimum coverage amounts, and that the mortgage clause14for the mortgagee16is in fact correct in such policy12. Notably, if the mortgage clause14for the mortgagee16is in fact incorrect in such policy12, the tracking agent20effectuates correcting same.

It is also to be appreciated that many insurance companies10that issue such property policies12employ third parties as notification agents22to assist in notifying mortgagees16of various information. As should be understood, each notification agent22acts as an agent of an insurance company10and among other things notifies mortgagees16when the insurance company10makes changes to policies12thereof regarding the mortgagees16. For example, when each such policy12is issued or canceled, the notification agent22notifies the mortgagee16of such issuance or cancellation.

As was set forth above, a mortgage clause database18as owned and maintained by a particular insurance company10is usually not particularly well-maintained, perhaps because the particular insurance company10does not usually have the best information needed to populate and update such database18with current mortgage clauses14for corresponding mortgagees16. At any rate, an insurance company10is likely not the best entity to own and maintain such a database18, especially inasmuch as the insurance company10is not in the business of locating and keeping current such information on such mortgage clauses14.

It would appear that a tracking agent20would be a better entity to own and maintain such a database18, especially inasmuch as the tracking agent20is in fact in the business of locating and keeping current such information on such mortgage clauses14. However, and notably, such a tracking agent20is typically an agent of a mortgagee16and not an insurance company10, and accordingly a potential conflict would exist if an insurance company10were to employ a tracking agent20as an agent of such insurance company10, especially when the tracking agent20is also an agent of a mortgagee16. Put simply, such a tracking agent20would owe duties to both the insurance company10and the mortgagee16and the owed duties could potentially conflict with each other.

Accordingly, upon further reflection, and in various embodiments of the present innovation, a notification agent22would in fact be a better entity to own and maintain such a mortgage clause database18a, as is shown inFIG. 4. Here, although the notification agent20is not in fact in the business of locating and keeping current such information on such mortgage clauses14, the notification agent20is in the business of obtaining and providing information, and accordingly locating and keeping current such information on such mortgage clauses14in the database18awould not be entirely foreign to such notification agent20. Perhaps more significantly, such a notification agent22is typically an agent of an insurance company10and not a mortgagee16, and accordingly no potential conflict would exist if an insurance company10were to employ a notification agent22as an agent of such insurance company10, especially when the notification agent22traditionally fulfills such a role.

With such a mortgage clause database18aas maintained for the insurance company10by a third party such as a notification agent22, then, issuing a policy12with a mortgage clause14may be performed in the manner shown inFIG. 5in accordance with various embodiments of the present innovation. In particular, and turning now toFIG. 5, it is seen that obtaining a particular mortgage clause14corresponding to a particular mortgagee16may comprise identifying the particular mortgagee16for a piece of property to the database18a(501). As may be appreciated, such identifying could be performed by a policy agent or service representative or the like (hereinafter, ‘service representative’) of the insurance company10for a customer, perhaps during a telephone or in-person conversation between such customer and representative. Alternatively, such identifying could be performed directly by the customer, perhaps in an on-line transaction with an inter-network site of the insurance company10. At any rate, the identification would presumably be more reliable inasmuch as the information in the database18ashould be likewise more reliable.

Upon identifying the particular mortgagee16to the database18aas at501, the database18awould then determine whether the identified mortgagee16has an appropriate entry therein (503). If so (505), the entry is selected (507) and a pre-defined mortgage clause14for the identified mortgagee16as maintained by the third party agent of the insurance company10is retrieved from the selected entry (509) and returned to the insurance company10(511), after which the insurance company10appropriately inserts same as inserted text into the policy12issued for the piece of property (513). Additionally, and as before, such retrieved clause14from the database18amay also be employed to directly bill the mortgagee16for the cost of the policy12or otherwise notify the mortgagee16regarding the policy12(515).

Note here that the process as shown inFIG. 5relies on a correct identification by a customer or a representative. As should be understood, such an identification by such customer or representative may not be necessary or even advisable. For one thing, such an identification may still be incorrect. For another, the identification even if correct may not be acceptable in certain circumstances.

With regard to the latter, it is to be understood that issuing a policy12such as in connection with the various embodiments of the present innovation is often performed in connection with settlement of the purchase or the like of the property for which the policy12is issued, and that such settlement may be performed by a settlement office or the like who has been previously informed of a supposedly correct mortgage clause14. Notably, such supposedly correct mortgage clause14is actually wrong, but the settlement officer cannot allow settlement to proceed without issuance of a policy12for the property with the supposedly correct but actually wrong mortgage clause14. Thus, it may actually be necessary to issue the policy12with an incorrect mortgage clause14.

Accordingly, and turning now toFIG. 6, a process is provided to issue a policy12without a correct identification of a mortgage clause14in accordance with various embodiments of the present innovation. In pertinent part, a policy service representative or the like of the insurance company10or else the customer does not identify the particular mortgagee16for a piece of property and does not contact the database18a. Instead, the representative or customer provides contact information for an entity that will select the mortgage clause14(601). Such contact information should include an electronic mail address or the like for the selecting entity.

Thereafter, the policy12is issued without any mortgage clause14in a declarations page thereof (603), and thereafter the electronic mail address for the selecting entity is employed to send an electronic mail message to same (605). Note here that the selecting entity may be any appropriate entity without departing from the spirit and scope of the present innovation. For example, the selecting entity may be a person or an automated service at the mortgagee16for the property, or for an agent of such mortgagee16. Such selecting entity may even be the aforementioned settlement officer.

Upon receiving the sent electronic mail message, the selecting entity opens same and actuates a link or other accessing device (hereinafter, ‘link’) within the message (607). In various embodiments of the present innovation, and as should now be appreciated, the actuated link directs the selecting entity to the mortgage clause database18awhere the selecting entity may then select from such database18aan entry having the appropriate mortgage clause14for the policy12for the particular mortgagee16(609a). Presumably, the selecting entity is aware of the particular mortgagee16and the appropriate mortgage clause14thereof for the policy12. Alternately, if the appropriate mortgage clause14is not in the database18a, the selecting entity may manually supply the appropriate mortgage clause14(609b).

In either case, the selected clause14is then supplied by the database18ato the insurance company10in connection with the policy12(611), the insurance company updates the policy12with the supplied clause14(613), and an amended declarations page with the supplied clause14is then issued for the policy12(615). Note here that the amended declarations page may be sent to the customer, to a settlement officer if necessary, or to another appropriate person or location by regular or electronic mail. Note too that in the case where the amended declarations page contains an incorrect mortgage clause14as manually entered by a settlement officer, the incorrect mortgage clause14may be corrected at a later time by a tracking agent20for the mortgagee16, or may be corrected by an administrator of the database18awho would be flagged to investigate the manually entered mortgage clause14.

Significantly, the process as set forth inFIG. 6may be initiated by a policy service representative of the insurance company10for a customer, perhaps during a telephone or in-person conversation between such customer and representative. Alternatively, such identifying could be performed directly by the customer, perhaps in an on-line transaction with an inter-network site of the insurance company10.

At any rate, the selection of the mortgage clause14at609aaccording to the process ofFIG. 6would presumably be more reliable, inasmuch as the selection of the clause14from the database18ais performed by a selecting entity that presumably has better knowledge as to which clause14to select from such database18a. Put simply, the identification of the correct mortgage clause14is performed by or on behalf of the mortgagee16which ought to know the correct mortgage clause14, and not by or on behalf of the insurance company10or the customer, and thus the insurance company10need not deal with correcting as many errors in connection with such mortgage clause14. Of course, the manual entry of such clause at609bis less reliable, but nevertheless may be necessary such as for example in the situation set forth above regarding the settlement officer who cannot allow settlement to proceed without issuance of a policy12for the property with a supposedly correct but actually wrong mortgage clause14.

CONCLUSION

The programming believed necessary to effectuate the processes performed in connection with the various embodiments of the present innovation is relatively straight-forward and should be apparent to the relevant programming public. Accordingly, such programming is not attached hereto. Any particular programming, then, may be employed to effectuate the various embodiments of the present innovation without departing from the spirit and scope thereof.

In the present innovation, systems and methods are provided for selecting the correct clause for a document, and specifically the correct mortgage clause14to be inserted into an insurance policy12. Such selection of the correct clause14is from a third party database18athat is better maintained than the mortgage clause database18as maintained by an insurance company10, and can be performed by an entity related to the mortgagee16, which ought to be better able to select the correct clause14.

It should be appreciated that changes could be made to the embodiments described above without departing from the innovative concepts thereof. For example although the various embodiments of the present innovation are primarily set forth above in terms of a mortgage clause14for an insurance policy12for property, such innovation may also be employed in any type of encumbrance clause in connection with any other insurance policy12, such as for example a collateral clause in an automobile insurance policy12, or for that matter in connection with any other clause to be inserted in any other document. It should be understood, therefore, that this innovation is not limited to the particular embodiments disclosed, but it is intended to cover modifications within the spirit and scope of the present innovation as defined by the appended claims.