\”roger, it doesn\’t matter how you want to disect the forensics of how the house was damaged.
The only thing that matters is how the policy is written\”.
__________
Actually Mark, don\’t insurers want their paying clients to \’disect\’ and truly understand the contract-of-adhesion / coverage stated or implied fiduciary relationship they convinced their client to become involve in?
\’Discecting\’ structural component damage is what engineers, and experienced contractors, do everyday for insurers and ones insured, or not insured.
Imagine how ones insured could be improperly indemnified, and/or intentionally taken advantage of, if visible, or abstractly invisible, property damage was not thought about, reasoned on, and fairly acted on.
Are you an loss claim adjuster Mark?
Whether you are or not, you may find a Google search on the following interesting;
1. [Wind borne] sewawater/salt crystallization effects on (non-flood exposed) construction components.
2. Residual effects of [salty / non-salty] moisture on (non-flooded) metal / fasteners, wood / fasteners, electrical, and other construction material components.
3. Micro fracturing effects of wind / water affected construction components.
3. Tension Bending effects on wind/hail affected construction components.
(Roof clay / concrete tiles, slate, and etc. other external / internal construction components).
4. Acoustic Resonance effect principles on wind/hail/earthquake/sound/impact affected construction components.
__________
\”Undamaged materials are essentially linear in their resonant response.
The same material, however, becomes highly nonlinear when damaged, manifested by amplitude dependent resonance frequency shifts, harmonic generation and nonlinear attenuation.
We illustrate the method by experiments on artificial slate tiles used in roofing construction.\”
__________
(Hard-to-detect broken stuff \’sounds\’ different compared to unbroken stuff). Universal physics constants matter Mark…
Thankfully, natural cause-and-effect laws and principles, and historical documented evidence that supports common wind/hail/moisture/fire/etc. construction material components damage, can be honestly accounted for…
…IF ones learn how to, or know others who know how to, objectively and appropriately, \’discect\’ and properly interpret insured or non-insured damaged properties true post-\”incident\” state.
This is not a Flood Exclusion. It is a Water Exclusion. Most Homeowners Policies use the following wording if not very similar \”c. Water Damage, meaning: (1) Flood, surface water, waves, tidal water, overflow of a body of water, or spray from any of these, whether or not driven by wind; (2) Water which backs up through sewers or drains or which overflows from a sump; or (3) Water below the surface of the ground, including water which exerts pressure on or seeps or leaks through a building, sidewals, driveway, foundation, swimming pool or other structure.
Direct loss by fire, explosion or theft resulting from water damage is covered.\”
This is right from my Homeowners Policy and I live in the midwest.
Argue it any way that you want. The bottom line is that water damage is excluded. Period. End of Story. Enough!!!
2. Windstorm or hail. This peril does not include loss to property contained in a building caused by rain, snow, sleet,sand or dust.
THIS LIMITATION DOES NOT APPLY WHEN* the direct force of wind or hail damages the the building causing an opening in a roof or wall and the rain, snow, sleet sand or dust enters through this opening.\”
3. Explosion.
4. Riot or Civil commotion.
5-16. Review a policy for those details.
\’Whether driven by rain or not\’, and \’wind created openings\’ that allow wind driven rain to enter a property, are two different sets of \’incident\’ circumstances.
Wind does create opportunity for moisture damage loss to be covered.
WAKE UP PEOPLE. WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM IS FOR? HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO TELL PEOPLE THAT HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE DOES NOT COVER FLOOD. I ACTUALLY HAD A CUSTOMER TELL ME THAT THE WATER IN HER HOUSE WAS NOT FLOOD WATER BECAUSE IT CAME FROM CHALMETTE AND NOT FROM LAKE PONCHATRAIN. HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT ONE!!!!!
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
5-24,2006
Mark,
You stated,
\”roger, it doesn\’t matter how you want to disect the forensics of how the house was damaged.
The only thing that matters is how the policy is written\”.
__________
Actually Mark, don\’t insurers want their paying clients to \’disect\’ and truly understand the contract-of-adhesion / coverage stated or implied fiduciary relationship they convinced their client to become involve in?
\’Discecting\’ structural component damage is what engineers, and experienced contractors, do everyday for insurers and ones insured, or not insured.
Imagine how ones insured could be improperly indemnified, and/or intentionally taken advantage of, if visible, or abstractly invisible, property damage was not thought about, reasoned on, and fairly acted on.
Are you an loss claim adjuster Mark?
Whether you are or not, you may find a Google search on the following interesting;
1. [Wind borne] sewawater/salt crystallization effects on (non-flood exposed) construction components.
2. Residual effects of [salty / non-salty] moisture on (non-flooded) metal / fasteners, wood / fasteners, electrical, and other construction material components.
3. Micro fracturing effects of wind / water affected construction components.
3. Tension Bending effects on wind/hail affected construction components.
(Roof clay / concrete tiles, slate, and etc. other external / internal construction components).
4. Acoustic Resonance effect principles on wind/hail/earthquake/sound/impact affected construction components.
__________
\”Undamaged materials are essentially linear in their resonant response.
The same material, however, becomes highly nonlinear when damaged, manifested by amplitude dependent resonance frequency shifts, harmonic generation and nonlinear attenuation.
We illustrate the method by experiments on artificial slate tiles used in roofing construction.\”
__________
(Hard-to-detect broken stuff \’sounds\’ different compared to unbroken stuff). Universal physics constants matter Mark…
The environment, damaged stuff is in, can eventualy make undetected (or undisclosed) \’sudden and accidental\’ damage synthetically look like \’natural weathering, or manufacturer defects.
__________
http://www.physik3.gwdg.de/isna/talk-list-abstracts/K.van_den_Abeele1.html
http://www.aaende.org.ar/sitio/biblioteca/material/T-061.pdf
Thankfully, natural cause-and-effect laws and principles, and historical documented evidence that supports common wind/hail/moisture/fire/etc. construction material components damage, can be honestly accounted for…
…IF ones learn how to, or know others who know how to, objectively and appropriately, \’discect\’ and properly interpret insured or non-insured damaged properties true post-\”incident\” state.
rogerpoegc@yahoo.com
P.S. Unintended Consequences – Is an interesting read.
http://www.dougsimpson.com/blog/archives/000464.html
This is not a Flood Exclusion. It is a Water Exclusion. Most Homeowners Policies use the following wording if not very similar \”c. Water Damage, meaning: (1) Flood, surface water, waves, tidal water, overflow of a body of water, or spray from any of these, whether or not driven by wind; (2) Water which backs up through sewers or drains or which overflows from a sump; or (3) Water below the surface of the ground, including water which exerts pressure on or seeps or leaks through a building, sidewals, driveway, foundation, swimming pool or other structure.
Direct loss by fire, explosion or theft resulting from water damage is covered.\”
This is right from my Homeowners Policy and I live in the midwest.
Argue it any way that you want. The bottom line is that water damage is excluded. Period. End of Story. Enough!!!
State Farm homeowners Policy 2006
Section One – Losses Insured
1. Fire or lightning.
2. Windstorm or hail. This peril does not include loss to property contained in a building caused by rain, snow, sleet,sand or dust.
THIS LIMITATION DOES NOT APPLY WHEN* the direct force of wind or hail damages the the building causing an opening in a roof or wall and the rain, snow, sleet sand or dust enters through this opening.\”
3. Explosion.
4. Riot or Civil commotion.
5-16. Review a policy for those details.
\’Whether driven by rain or not\’, and \’wind created openings\’ that allow wind driven rain to enter a property, are two different sets of \’incident\’ circumstances.
Wind does create opportunity for moisture damage loss to be covered.
*Capitalization added for emphasis.
WAKE UP PEOPLE. WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM IS FOR? HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO TELL PEOPLE THAT HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE DOES NOT COVER FLOOD. I ACTUALLY HAD A CUSTOMER TELL ME THAT THE WATER IN HER HOUSE WAS NOT FLOOD WATER BECAUSE IT CAME FROM CHALMETTE AND NOT FROM LAKE PONCHATRAIN. HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT ONE!!!!!