Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	We are a defendant in a lawsuit filed on August 6, 1999, in the Texas District Court, Austin, Texas, now styled Delia Bolanos Andrade, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Citizens Insurance Company of America, et al., Defendants in which a class was originally certified by the trial court and reversed by the Texas Supreme Court in 2007 with an order to the trial court to conduct further proceedings consistent with its ruling. The underlying lawsuit alleged that certain life insurance policies CICA made available to non-U.S. residents, when combined with a policy feature that allowed certain cash benefits to be assigned to two non-U.S. trusts for the purpose of accumulating ownership of our Class A common stock, along with allowing the policyholders to make additional contributions to the trusts, were actually offers and sales of securities that occurred in Texas by unregistered dealers in violation of the Texas securities laws. The remedy sought was rescission and return of the insurance premium payments. On December 9, 2009, the trial court denied the recertification of the class after conducting additional proceedings in accordance with the Texas Supreme Court's ruling. The remaining plaintiffs must now proceed individually, and not as a class, if they intend to pursue their claims against us. Since the December 9, 2009 trial court ruling, no individual cases have been further pursued by the plaintiffs. The probability of the plaintiffs further pursuing their cases individually remains unknown. An estimate of any possible loss or range of losses cannot be made at this time in regard to individuals pursuing claims. However, should the plaintiffs further pursue their claims individually, we intend to vigorously defend any proceedings. In 2007 and in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the Attorney General for the State of Louisiana filed suit in the Civil District Court for the Parish of New Orleans (later removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana) against SPFIC and every other homeowner insurer doing business in the State of Louisiana, on behalf of the State of Louisiana, as assignee, and on behalf of certain Road Home fund recipients. In April 2013, SPFIC and the State of Louisiana reached a confidential settlement agreement resolving substantially all claims against SPFIC in the Road Home matter for approximately $183,000. This amount has been accrued in the March 31, 2013 financial statements and did not have a material impact on the consolidated financials. SPFIC is vigorously defending a number of matters in various stages of development filed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita in addition to the Road Home Litigation, including a number of individual lawsuits, which are immaterial to the Company's financial statements. We are defending these claims vigorously. However, in doing so, we continue to incur significant defense costs, including attorneys' fees, other direct litigation costs and the expenditure of substantial amounts of management time that otherwise would be devoted to our business. By letter dated September 7, 2012, three state departments of treasury (or equivalent state agencies) notified the Company they intend to audit Citizens, Inc. and certain of its affiliates for compliance with unclaimed property laws. As of December 31, 2012, all three states had agreed to allow the Company to complete its own internal audit during 2013. The Company is currently performing the internal audit related to unclaimed property for all legal reporting entities. This audit began in the prior year and based upon the review to date, we have identified certain policies that were part of acquisition conversions that have resulted in data reviews and policy accounting that has not followed our standard escheatment processes. There are certain policies that have been recorded as deposit-type contracts upon conversion that, due to lack of sufficient policyholder data and contact information, may be potential escheatment liabilities. This would result in a reclassification of the current related deposit liability to the escheatment liability account and did not materially impact earnings. Due to the fact that these policies have been reserved without policyholder contact for an extended period of time they may likely be escheatable in the current year. The audit may result in additional payments to beneficiaries, additional escheatment of funds deemed abandoned under state laws, administrative penalties, interest, and changes to the Company's procedures for the identification and escheatment of abandoned property. At this time, the Company is not able to estimate any of these possible amounts, but such costs could be substantial for a company our size.

We are a defendant in a lawsuit filed on August 6, 1999, in the Texas District Court, Austin, Texas, now styled Delia Bolanos Andrade, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Citizens Insurance Company of America, et al., Defendants in which a class was originally certified by the trial court and reversed by the Texas Supreme Court in 2007 with an order to the trial court to conduct further proceedings consistent with its ruling. The underlying lawsuit alleged that certain life insurance policies CICA made available to non-U.S. residents, when combined with a policy feature that allowed certain cash benefits to be assigned to two non-U.S. trusts for the purpose of accumulating ownership of our Class A common stock, along with allowing the policyholders to make additional contributions to the trusts, were actually offers and sales of securities that occurred in Texas by unregistered dealers in violation of the Texas securities laws. The remedy sought was rescission and return of the insurance premium payments. On December 9, 2009, the trial court denied the recertification of the class after conducting additional proceedings in accordance with the Texas Supreme Court's ruling. The remaining plaintiffs must now proceed individually, and not as a class, if they intend to pursue their claims against us. Since the December 9, 2009 trial court ruling, no individual cases have been further pursued by the plaintiffs. The probability of the plaintiffs further pursuing their cases individually remains unknown. An estimate of any possible loss or range of losses cannot be made at this time in regard to individuals pursuing claims. However, should the plaintiffs further pursue their claims individually, we intend to vigorously defend any proceedings.

In 2007 and in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the Attorney General for the State of Louisiana filed suit in the Civil District Court for the Parish of New Orleans (later removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana) against SPFIC and every other homeowner insurer doing business in the State of Louisiana, on behalf of the State of Louisiana, as assignee, and on behalf of certain Road Home fund recipients. In April 2013, SPFIC and the State of Louisiana reached a confidential settlement agreement resolving substantially all claims against SPFIC in the Road Home matter for approximately $183,000. This amount has been accrued in the March 31, 2013 financial statements and did not have a material impact on the consolidated financials.

SPFIC is vigorously defending a number of matters in various stages of development filed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita in addition to the Road Home Litigation, including a number of individual lawsuits, which are immaterial to the Company's financial statements.

We are defending these claims vigorously. However, in doing so, we continue to incur significant defense costs, including attorneys' fees, other direct litigation costs and the expenditure of substantial amounts of management time that otherwise would be devoted to our business.

By letter dated September 7, 2012, three state departments of treasury (or equivalent state agencies) notified the Company they intend to audit Citizens, Inc. and certain of its affiliates for compliance with unclaimed property laws. As of December 31, 2012, all three states had agreed to allow the Company to complete its own internal audit during 2013. The Company is currently performing the internal audit related to unclaimed property for all legal reporting entities. This audit began in the prior year and based upon the review to date, we have identified certain policies that were part of acquisition conversions that have resulted in data reviews and policy accounting that has not followed our standard escheatment processes. There are certain policies that have been recorded as deposit-type contracts upon conversion that, due to lack of sufficient policyholder data and contact information, may be potential escheatment liabilities. This would result in a reclassification of the current related deposit liability to the escheatment liability account and did not materially impact earnings. Due to the fact that these policies have been reserved without policyholder contact for an extended period of time they may likely be escheatable in the current year.

The audit may result in additional payments to beneficiaries, additional escheatment of funds deemed abandoned under state laws, administrative penalties, interest, and changes to the Company's procedures for the identification and escheatment of abandoned property. At this time, the Company is not able to estimate any of these possible amounts, but such costs could be substantial for a company our size.