It appears with all the policy litigation arising out of Katrina that the only reasonable thing insurers can do is completely withdraw from the market in Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida and the Gulf Coast of Texas. Since when does an insurer have to explain to a person living below sea level that the policy, which excludes flood of any type, will not provide coverage in the event a levee breaks or fails? Has this nation on a whole \’dumbed down\’ so much that no one understands the levees are the only thing holding water back? And that if the levee fails for any reason, there is going to be a flood? I just don\’t get it! Carriers withdraw, and let those states deal with their own problems of flood, hurricane, levees, etc.
I\’m not sure exactly what the policy language is, but this argument about the levee breach seems to be nothing more than a major \”red herring\” – the exclusion is for WATER, however caused. The levy breach didn\’t damage the houses, water did.
All this is going to do is to delay payments of claims for years, if you consider discovery, trial and appeals. The companies are not going to roll over and pay hundreds of millions of dollars for an excluded cause of loss, especially when you consider that no premium was ever collected.
The recent rulings in federal court in Mississippi clearly uphold the so-called \”flood exclusion\”, and there\’s no reason to believe that a court in a neighboring state will reach a totally opposite conclusion.
Insurers do not need to retreat from the coastal areas.
Recent press, litigation and the loud expressions from the public demonstrate that the residents in those areas have an insatiable expectation that their homeowners insurance provide coverage for
flood perils etc. on a truly all risk basis.
I find it hard to believe that any insurer lacks the actuarial ability to promulgate
an adequate rate to cover such exposures.
Admittedly, such a scheme might require dramatic increases (doubling, tripling, quadrupaling? in existing rate structures, but let market forces decide.
If the public decides that the required insurance premium is not economically feasable, they can make the decision not to insurer their property. In the worse case scenario they would merely suffer the inconvenience of needing to stop by the bank and paying off their mortgages if they elected to violate the mandatory insurance requirements.
To Give…state insurance regulation is charged with making sure rates are ADEQUATE, NOT DISCRIMINATORY and NOT UNFAIRLY EXCESSIVE. If an insurer were to try to charge sound rates for true \’all risk\’ insurance to include flood, the rates would be so high that regulators would not allow them. Take Florida, carriers are increasing rates just to cover the wind exposure, and regulators are not allowing the actuarial sound rates, stating the increases being sought are excessive. Trying to write flood coverage is a no win situation for private carriers, which is why the NFIP has been a federal program for decades.
The public has what it wants, it just choses to ignore it. You can buy a package of insurance policies (or in some cases a single policy) that will provide all risk coverage. Most don\’t purchase that extent of coverage due to cost. Bundling all the perils into a single policy will only result in quicker sticker shock. The public has exactly what it wants, a convenient excuse to not accept responsibility for their decisions. Why do you think the trial lawyers are so happy?
Katrina was only a drill for what is to come. Look at any of the legitimate global warming models and we\’re looking at increased storm intensity from warm surface water temps in the ocean as well as rising oceans. Alaska is melting as is the Antarctic and the rate of melt is increasing at unexpectedly increased rates in recent years.
If you aren\’t a big enough insurer to do intense diversification and re-insurance you better stay away from the coasts and leave that to the giants of the industry. There seems to be a ridiculous argument about whether this is a natural occurrence or man made (or contributed to) event which seems an absurd place to hang the argument.
Who cares why it is happening, it is happening; the question is how can it be slowed or reversed and how do we, the insurance professionals deal with this issue from an insurance and financial standpoint. It\’s time to take our heads out of the sand on this issue or get sand in our faces with catastrophic losses and continued lawsuits such as this class-action.
\”The Amended Complaint alleges a BROAD RANGE of CONDUCT and WRONGFUL ACTS by the insurance company that were designed solely to deny coverage of valid policyholder claims.
Among the wrongful acts set forth by the policyholders is the insurance companies\’ mandate and directive that its adjusters arbitrarily and capriciously apply any nearby waterline and IGNORE all other relevant information and evidence in order to deny full payment of policyholders\’ claims under applicable \”flood\” exclusions.
The policyholders also detail the insurance companies\’ failure to follow long-standing legal doctrines by attempting to equate windstorm, storm surge and the negligent design, construction and maintenance of New Orleans area levees with \”flooding\” to exclude coverage.\”
_____
Just those consumer [indemnification] issues alone appear to have enough merit for the named law firms to justify their, and the legal systems\’, involvement.
THIS IS AMERICA! THIS IS OUR LAND.
WE ARE AMERICANS, HOMEOWNERS, LAW ABIDING CITIZENS THAT WORK, PAY TAXES AND OBEY THE LAWS OF MAN.
WE PAY INSURANCE COMPANIES TO FINANCIALLY PROTECT OUR HOMES.
NOW KATRINA HIT & BLEW THE COVERS OFF THE INS. INDUSTRY.
VIDEO EVIDENCE FROM LA TO MS…
PROVE KATRINA WINDS BLEW TREES DOWN & BLEW ROOF TOPS OFF BEFORE THE WATER ARRIVED.
STATE FARM INS IN MS DENIED MANY CLAIMS AND BLAMED THE WATER.
MY OWN ADJUSTER LIED ABOUT HIS EXCUSE TO DENY THE CLAIM. HE SAID AN ENGINEERING FIRM SAID, I HAD ALL WATER DAMAGE.
MS IS WORST THAN NEW ORLEANS.
I ASKED HIM FOR THE NAME OF THE ENG. FIRM AND HE STUDDERED. AFTER SEVERAL MONTHS, I COMPLAINED AND STATE FARM SAID THEY NEVER HAD AN ENG. OR ENG.FIRM AT MY PROPERTY.
THEY SAID THEY WOULD SEND ANOTHER ADJUSTER BUT THAT WAS ANOTHER LIE. THEY DENIED THE CLAIMS BY BLAMING WATER AND THAT IS FALSE.
THE WINDS WERE 100-200 MPH AND HIT LAND ONE TO FOUR HOURS BEFORE THE DAM WATER!
THEY ARE TRYING TO GET OUT OF PAYING AND THEY ARE ALLOWING THE GOVERNMENT TO BAIL THEM OUT BUT BLAME US WHEN WE STEP UP TO THE PLATE TO CONDEM THEM.
THEY NEED TO BE BROUGHT TO JUSTICE AND TRIED BY A JURY.
WE, THE PEOPLE…HAVE NO RIGHTS.
A CRIMINAL HAS MORE RIGHTS AND THEY FEAR VIOLATING ANYONE OF THEIR RIGHTS.
IT\’S TIME FOR AMERICA TO BECOME UNITED-
AS ONE. WE THE PEOPLE… NEED TO STAND UP AND STAND TOGETHER TO DEMAND JUSTICE FOR ALL. WE\’VE COME A LONG WAY. KATRINA NEVER CARED ABOUT YOUR TITLE, SALARY OR THE COLOR OF YOUR SKIN. I DON\’T EITHER.
WE ARE PEOPLE. YOU OR EITHER GOOD OR BAD, RIGHT OR WRONG BUT WE ALL HAVE A CHOICE!
THIS IS AMERICA, LET OUR CHILDREN LEARN FROM OUR MISTAKES SO THEY CAN HAVE A BETTER LIFE.
IF THERE WAS ANY REASON WHY GOD LET KATRINA DESTROY THIS LAND…
I\’D SAY FOR ONE…
DENOUNCE THEM BY NAME. Every corrupt Politician & Corporation shall be Denounced by Name.
IT\’S TIME TO HELP EACH OTHER.
WE\’RE IN THIS TOGETHER BUT OUTSIDERS DON\’T UNDERSTAND…and that\’s because
THIS NEVER HAPPENED TO THEM. I
BE GOOD TO EACH OTHER, IT\’S A FREE GIFT FROM THE MAN ABOVE. OUR JOURNEY ISN\’T OVER HERE AND IT\’S TIME TO REBUILD OUR HOMES AND LIVES TOO.
I have never seen an insurance law that requires that rates not be \”unfairly\” excessive. \”Excessive\” should be interpreted to mean that the premium is too high compared to the potential losses and expenses. If \”excessive\” just means it\’s higher than the customer wants to pay, I think I\’ll call my Insurance Commissioner and whine about how high my (KS) Homeowner\’s premium is because the insurer expects it to be adequate for the tornado risk.
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.
It appears with all the policy litigation arising out of Katrina that the only reasonable thing insurers can do is completely withdraw from the market in Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida and the Gulf Coast of Texas. Since when does an insurer have to explain to a person living below sea level that the policy, which excludes flood of any type, will not provide coverage in the event a levee breaks or fails? Has this nation on a whole \’dumbed down\’ so much that no one understands the levees are the only thing holding water back? And that if the levee fails for any reason, there is going to be a flood? I just don\’t get it! Carriers withdraw, and let those states deal with their own problems of flood, hurricane, levees, etc.
I\’m not sure exactly what the policy language is, but this argument about the levee breach seems to be nothing more than a major \”red herring\” – the exclusion is for WATER, however caused. The levy breach didn\’t damage the houses, water did.
All this is going to do is to delay payments of claims for years, if you consider discovery, trial and appeals. The companies are not going to roll over and pay hundreds of millions of dollars for an excluded cause of loss, especially when you consider that no premium was ever collected.
The recent rulings in federal court in Mississippi clearly uphold the so-called \”flood exclusion\”, and there\’s no reason to believe that a court in a neighboring state will reach a totally opposite conclusion.
Insurers do not need to retreat from the coastal areas.
Recent press, litigation and the loud expressions from the public demonstrate that the residents in those areas have an insatiable expectation that their homeowners insurance provide coverage for
flood perils etc. on a truly all risk basis.
I find it hard to believe that any insurer lacks the actuarial ability to promulgate
an adequate rate to cover such exposures.
Admittedly, such a scheme might require dramatic increases (doubling, tripling, quadrupaling? in existing rate structures, but let market forces decide.
If the public decides that the required insurance premium is not economically feasable, they can make the decision not to insurer their property. In the worse case scenario they would merely suffer the inconvenience of needing to stop by the bank and paying off their mortgages if they elected to violate the mandatory insurance requirements.
To Give…state insurance regulation is charged with making sure rates are ADEQUATE, NOT DISCRIMINATORY and NOT UNFAIRLY EXCESSIVE. If an insurer were to try to charge sound rates for true \’all risk\’ insurance to include flood, the rates would be so high that regulators would not allow them. Take Florida, carriers are increasing rates just to cover the wind exposure, and regulators are not allowing the actuarial sound rates, stating the increases being sought are excessive. Trying to write flood coverage is a no win situation for private carriers, which is why the NFIP has been a federal program for decades.
The public has what it wants, it just choses to ignore it. You can buy a package of insurance policies (or in some cases a single policy) that will provide all risk coverage. Most don\’t purchase that extent of coverage due to cost. Bundling all the perils into a single policy will only result in quicker sticker shock. The public has exactly what it wants, a convenient excuse to not accept responsibility for their decisions. Why do you think the trial lawyers are so happy?
Katrina was only a drill for what is to come. Look at any of the legitimate global warming models and we\’re looking at increased storm intensity from warm surface water temps in the ocean as well as rising oceans. Alaska is melting as is the Antarctic and the rate of melt is increasing at unexpectedly increased rates in recent years.
If you aren\’t a big enough insurer to do intense diversification and re-insurance you better stay away from the coasts and leave that to the giants of the industry. There seems to be a ridiculous argument about whether this is a natural occurrence or man made (or contributed to) event which seems an absurd place to hang the argument.
Who cares why it is happening, it is happening; the question is how can it be slowed or reversed and how do we, the insurance professionals deal with this issue from an insurance and financial standpoint. It\’s time to take our heads out of the sand on this issue or get sand in our faces with catastrophic losses and continued lawsuits such as this class-action.
\”The Amended Complaint alleges a BROAD RANGE of CONDUCT and WRONGFUL ACTS by the insurance company that were designed solely to deny coverage of valid policyholder claims.
Among the wrongful acts set forth by the policyholders is the insurance companies\’ mandate and directive that its adjusters arbitrarily and capriciously apply any nearby waterline and IGNORE all other relevant information and evidence in order to deny full payment of policyholders\’ claims under applicable \”flood\” exclusions.
The policyholders also detail the insurance companies\’ failure to follow long-standing legal doctrines by attempting to equate windstorm, storm surge and the negligent design, construction and maintenance of New Orleans area levees with \”flooding\” to exclude coverage.\”
_____
Just those consumer [indemnification] issues alone appear to have enough merit for the named law firms to justify their, and the legal systems\’, involvement.
THIS IS AMERICA! THIS IS OUR LAND.
WE ARE AMERICANS, HOMEOWNERS, LAW ABIDING CITIZENS THAT WORK, PAY TAXES AND OBEY THE LAWS OF MAN.
WE PAY INSURANCE COMPANIES TO FINANCIALLY PROTECT OUR HOMES.
NOW KATRINA HIT & BLEW THE COVERS OFF THE INS. INDUSTRY.
VIDEO EVIDENCE FROM LA TO MS…
PROVE KATRINA WINDS BLEW TREES DOWN & BLEW ROOF TOPS OFF BEFORE THE WATER ARRIVED.
STATE FARM INS IN MS DENIED MANY CLAIMS AND BLAMED THE WATER.
MY OWN ADJUSTER LIED ABOUT HIS EXCUSE TO DENY THE CLAIM. HE SAID AN ENGINEERING FIRM SAID, I HAD ALL WATER DAMAGE.
MS IS WORST THAN NEW ORLEANS.
I ASKED HIM FOR THE NAME OF THE ENG. FIRM AND HE STUDDERED. AFTER SEVERAL MONTHS, I COMPLAINED AND STATE FARM SAID THEY NEVER HAD AN ENG. OR ENG.FIRM AT MY PROPERTY.
THEY SAID THEY WOULD SEND ANOTHER ADJUSTER BUT THAT WAS ANOTHER LIE. THEY DENIED THE CLAIMS BY BLAMING WATER AND THAT IS FALSE.
THE WINDS WERE 100-200 MPH AND HIT LAND ONE TO FOUR HOURS BEFORE THE DAM WATER!
THEY ARE TRYING TO GET OUT OF PAYING AND THEY ARE ALLOWING THE GOVERNMENT TO BAIL THEM OUT BUT BLAME US WHEN WE STEP UP TO THE PLATE TO CONDEM THEM.
THEY NEED TO BE BROUGHT TO JUSTICE AND TRIED BY A JURY.
WE, THE PEOPLE…HAVE NO RIGHTS.
A CRIMINAL HAS MORE RIGHTS AND THEY FEAR VIOLATING ANYONE OF THEIR RIGHTS.
IT\’S TIME FOR AMERICA TO BECOME UNITED-
AS ONE. WE THE PEOPLE… NEED TO STAND UP AND STAND TOGETHER TO DEMAND JUSTICE FOR ALL. WE\’VE COME A LONG WAY. KATRINA NEVER CARED ABOUT YOUR TITLE, SALARY OR THE COLOR OF YOUR SKIN. I DON\’T EITHER.
WE ARE PEOPLE. YOU OR EITHER GOOD OR BAD, RIGHT OR WRONG BUT WE ALL HAVE A CHOICE!
THIS IS AMERICA, LET OUR CHILDREN LEARN FROM OUR MISTAKES SO THEY CAN HAVE A BETTER LIFE.
IF THERE WAS ANY REASON WHY GOD LET KATRINA DESTROY THIS LAND…
I\’D SAY FOR ONE…
DENOUNCE THEM BY NAME. Every corrupt Politician & Corporation shall be Denounced by Name.
IT\’S TIME TO HELP EACH OTHER.
WE\’RE IN THIS TOGETHER BUT OUTSIDERS DON\’T UNDERSTAND…and that\’s because
THIS NEVER HAPPENED TO THEM. I
BE GOOD TO EACH OTHER, IT\’S A FREE GIFT FROM THE MAN ABOVE. OUR JOURNEY ISN\’T OVER HERE AND IT\’S TIME TO REBUILD OUR HOMES AND LIVES TOO.
I have never seen an insurance law that requires that rates not be \”unfairly\” excessive. \”Excessive\” should be interpreted to mean that the premium is too high compared to the potential losses and expenses. If \”excessive\” just means it\’s higher than the customer wants to pay, I think I\’ll call my Insurance Commissioner and whine about how high my (KS) Homeowner\’s premium is because the insurer expects it to be adequate for the tornado risk.
Foaming at the mouth only emphasizes the irrationality of your argument. Please leave the cap key alone.