House Reps. Introduce National Catastrophe Insurance Proposal

January 5, 2007

  • January 5, 2007 at 5:47 am
    JIM says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Anyone want another FEMA? If every risk was priced properly we wouldn\’t be having this discussion. How many times does the tide have to destroy a house on the same property before the owner realizes he will have to pay for it himself (or herself)? Perhaps living in a safer location is the answer. I too do not want to subsidise those who choose the more risky location.

  • January 6, 2007 at 3:58 am
    ray balaamababa says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Scott: sorry you feel as though your
    Florida reps have sold you out in the past, but your argument is essentially for a socialistic approach to national insurance rates because your current rates do not suit you. You complain about your property value, and property taxes going up, yet you fail to realize your property is located in a much more vulnerable location than most others.

    Sorry, the rest of us do not want to pay for your decision to live near the coast.

    If Allstate, State Farm, or whoever makes billions in profits in other states and loses money in Florida, your darn right they should be raising your rates, not the rates of others in the country.

    Someone earlier wrote about the choice of building a house on railroad tracks; yeah, it\’s likely the house will be hit by a train, but he liked the view and didn\’t want to move. Insurance is regulated, if the carriers were really gouging you in Florida (it doesn\’t appear they are), there would be carriers moving in with lower rates to scoop up all that business they could write for a slightly less premium.

    You live in a higher risk area, you should pay for the risk in your premiums.

  • January 8, 2007 at 8:16 am
    Andrew says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Well said Ray. To add to your point regarding insurance regulation, insurance commissioners in other states are not going to allow insurers to file rate increases based on their losses in Florida, Louisiana, etc. The insurance commissioners evaluate rate proposals based on losses/claims in their own state. This is why the Florida reps are trying to make this a federal program.

  • January 8, 2007 at 9:23 am
    Tired says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I am really getting tired of all the talk about how all the residents in FL deserve to have thier insurance premiums doubled and tripled. Not everyone in FL lives on a sandbar or has waterfront property. There are farmers who live inland who supply a lot of this nation with their produce. There are the workers of the fields. There are a lot of working people here just like in Kansas or any other northern or non coastal state. I have seen the premiums more than double on homes that have been built to withstand a hurricane with 145mph winds. They live inland and have never filed a claim. Would all of you want everyone to leave the state of FL and every other coastal state or region? Would it not get a bit crowded? Also, almost all our citrus and lettece are grown in either FL or CA. Do you want to give that up also? All of you need to get a life. It is call SPREAD OF RISK!!! I do agree that if you live on a sandbar and your home is distroyed, you either build elsewhere or no insurance and no subsidies from the government. No ALL the people in FL deserve this. They were born and raised here trying to make a living just like everyone else.

  • January 8, 2007 at 9:47 am
    Ray Balaamababa says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It\’s not about being \’deserved\’, but look no further than the population boom in the last 20 years and tell me there has not been a transfer of risk to those areas because of that boom.

    You don\’t have to be on a sandbar to have a greater risk; a large portion of the state of Florida is a risk for a major hurricane.

    Don\’t even get me started on sinkholes and the exemptions Florida has forced insurers to accept on those. Homeowners do share risk, but they typically don\’t share Orlando with NY City, and LA with Minneapolis…

  • January 8, 2007 at 12:45 pm
    Adirondacker says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Jeez Scott, I live so far \”Upstate\” New York most of the world doesn\’t even know I exist; yet my combined tax and homeowner insurance premium is nearly the same as yours. And I sure as hell don\’t get to play golf year round. The point is, we all have our costs to bear, and to a point, it all is relative to where we live. Is a portion of my tax bill and homeowner premium used to subsidize New York City? You bet your sweet-year-round-golfing-rear-end it is, but for the most part it is based on what type of home I own and where it is located.

    Suck it up and take it like good capitalist should…

  • January 8, 2007 at 1:22 am
    Tired says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The type of home you own in FL has nothing to do with your premium. My assistant owns a home, not on the water or barrier island, 32 ft above sea level, rated to withstand 145mph winds including the windows. Her insurance premium doubled. She weathered the hurricane season with no damage. Why did her insurance double?? Because she can play golf all year round?? Sorry to burst your bubble, but neither one of us plays golf.

  • January 8, 2007 at 1:38 am
    ray balaamababa says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    That still doesn\’t explain why I\’m supposed to subsidize part of your premium from another area. Hopefully your house will never be affected by a hurricane, unless we get a sea level change of approx 1200 feet, it\’s likely I won\’t be affect by a hurricane, either.

  • January 8, 2007 at 1:40 am
    Actuary says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Look at this picture: http://www.westonluxuryrealty.com/weston-florida-map.jpg

    When Floridians stops building homes on places like the Everglades and fix the Panhandle\’s building code exemption, I might start to be sympathetic.

    I lived in North Central Florida and got tired of hearing retirees with assets complaining about their insurance prices. Show me a plan them helps the truly needy pay for their insurance and I\’d get behind it. The risk (or its perception) has changed. The state needs to educate people about the costs so they understand what they\’re getting into.

  • January 9, 2007 at 2:06 am
    peyton says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I would like to thank all you for your charity,understanding in that you think it cannot happen to you.In FL we have been paying high premiums, huge ded.for Swiss cheese coverage for a long time.Approx 28 years btwn the previous big blow and Andrew in 1992, then we got hit with a season which had not happened in well over 100 years. Insurance is a risk based business,the risk is supposed to be spread not confined on a premiums collected basis in a single state. Nice bit of accounting sleight of hand.You folks up north should worry because some of the worst storms (see NOAA site)have hit you!You got no building codes,no experience,no oolite substructure but clay AND your big cities are below sea level.Let\’s see how you handle it! These storms come in certain cycles,it is natural.Next cycles are the classic Cape Verdes which come right up the Eastern Seaboard and you are no where near as prepared as FL!We have been paying through the nose forever and many of us have had no claims but cancelled anyway.They still want the other lines of business.Fat chance!



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*