Another example of the judiciary attempting to write (or retroactively rewrite) law. These judges who ignore prior case law are doing nothing but unfairly raising the expectations of those folks who chose not to buy flood insurance and are now trying to go through the backdoor to get money from the insurance companies. I feel sorry for the homeowners, but their failure should not be cause for ignoring the policy they chose to purchase.
With Liberals taking over the country we will see lots of new laws being written by judges. It\’s what they do. You get the kind of country you deserve/vote for.
Maybe the simple solution is to include the cost of flood coverage in the homeowners policies in LA. That way, when people don\’t buy any insurance, the judiciary can pay whatever claims they feel like because the application didn\’t say they had to pay premiums to get the coverage. Makes about as much sense.
Here is my plan from my lock box for Louisiana that fixes everything.
Insurance should be free to everybody in Louisiana because they like Al Gore there. Of course insurance is not free so I propose we let the federal government and the casinos pay for it. They have lots more money than poor people and they can always make money too. If Republicans would learn to think then they would be nice people too. Most of the people in Louisiana work for the casinos or are the government teat already so its not like they aren\’t paying for their free home and flood insurance already.
Here is my plan from my lock box for Louisiana that fixes everything.
Insurance should be free to everybody in Louisiana because they like Al Gore there. Of course insurance is not free so I propose we let the federal government and the casinos pay for it. They have lots more money than poor people and they can always make money too. If Republicans would learn to think then they would be nice people too. Most of the people in Louisiana work for the casinos or on the government teat already so its not like they aren\’t paying for their free home and flood insurance already.
When the citizens of LA find they cannot get HO insurance at any cost, they can thank the judges that ruled in their favor now. Already Allstate and State Farm are pulling from markets (where allowed), reducing coverage or increasing deductibles. Interesting to note that this case is against Citizens, which is funded by WHO?
Since each homeowner received a policy
outlining whats covered, and whats not,
isnt this a case that would be suitable
for appeal? When I fill out a credit
application, are all the loan terms
specified on the application? Isnt an
application document one uses to apply
for service? Can you imagine what a
homeowners insurance application would
look like if it was actually the policy?
Who insures a house for $55,000? Thats
$75 a foot for a 700 foot house. On what planet is anyone building a house for $55,000. Mud hut maybe, but I am sure that would test even the most corrupt building officials as are found in the
\’Big Stinky\’.
The Judge needs to pull his head out of the anal canal it is apparently wedged into. He needs to re-read the policy to see what the agreement was between the seller/insurer & the buyer/insured. I believe he needs help understanding some of the bigger words… like EXCLUSION…
I too am sorry for the losses that were incurred, but each person living in the flood prone areas are aware of the risks they take. Some may not have taken them as seriously as they really are, but they knew there was a risk.
It’s beginning to look like we might need a signed checklist to show what the insured wants quoted. When the insured checks off each policy they would like a quote on, then they need to review each endorsement that could be attached to that particular policy & sign each with their acceptance or rejection, kinda like we had to do with TRIA, then we may have a chance in the courtroom with judges like this one.
Oh, by the way, I have another idea… stop all the government funding for anyone that lives in areas such as this… New Welfare Requirements — if you ain’t gonna work for your $ then you gotta move to El Paso or some place like that! If you wanna do for yourself, then you work hard & pay the bills for where you wanna be! But if you are not motivated then you get to live in apartments with no amenities, no pool, no washer & dryer in the unit, no covered parking for the Cadillac, you know… things that are not quote what they want but just enough to cover their needs… No food stamps either, you have to eat from the neighborhood slop kitchen or get motivated & do for yourself. If you get pregnant more than once on welfare you should have to get fixed so you don\’t keep breeding.
These ideas would sure solve some of the debt problems we have & perhaps not make it so easy for the lazy in society to mooch off the citizens that are willing to do the best they can for their families.
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.
I don\’t have dog in this fight, but in my own state the valued policy laws have nothing to do with perils insured?
You have got to be kidding.
Another example of the judiciary attempting to write (or retroactively rewrite) law. These judges who ignore prior case law are doing nothing but unfairly raising the expectations of those folks who chose not to buy flood insurance and are now trying to go through the backdoor to get money from the insurance companies. I feel sorry for the homeowners, but their failure should not be cause for ignoring the policy they chose to purchase.
With Liberals taking over the country we will see lots of new laws being written by judges. It\’s what they do. You get the kind of country you deserve/vote for.
Maybe the simple solution is to include the cost of flood coverage in the homeowners policies in LA. That way, when people don\’t buy any insurance, the judiciary can pay whatever claims they feel like because the application didn\’t say they had to pay premiums to get the coverage. Makes about as much sense.
Here is my plan from my lock box for Louisiana that fixes everything.
Insurance should be free to everybody in Louisiana because they like Al Gore there. Of course insurance is not free so I propose we let the federal government and the casinos pay for it. They have lots more money than poor people and they can always make money too. If Republicans would learn to think then they would be nice people too. Most of the people in Louisiana work for the casinos or are the government teat already so its not like they aren\’t paying for their free home and flood insurance already.
Here is my plan from my lock box for Louisiana that fixes everything.
Insurance should be free to everybody in Louisiana because they like Al Gore there. Of course insurance is not free so I propose we let the federal government and the casinos pay for it. They have lots more money than poor people and they can always make money too. If Republicans would learn to think then they would be nice people too. Most of the people in Louisiana work for the casinos or on the government teat already so its not like they aren\’t paying for their free home and flood insurance already.
When the citizens of LA find they cannot get HO insurance at any cost, they can thank the judges that ruled in their favor now. Already Allstate and State Farm are pulling from markets (where allowed), reducing coverage or increasing deductibles. Interesting to note that this case is against Citizens, which is funded by WHO?
Since each homeowner received a policy
outlining whats covered, and whats not,
isnt this a case that would be suitable
for appeal? When I fill out a credit
application, are all the loan terms
specified on the application? Isnt an
application document one uses to apply
for service? Can you imagine what a
homeowners insurance application would
look like if it was actually the policy?
Who insures a house for $55,000? Thats
$75 a foot for a 700 foot house. On what planet is anyone building a house for $55,000. Mud hut maybe, but I am sure that would test even the most corrupt building officials as are found in the
\’Big Stinky\’.
The Judge needs to pull his head out of the anal canal it is apparently wedged into. He needs to re-read the policy to see what the agreement was between the seller/insurer & the buyer/insured. I believe he needs help understanding some of the bigger words… like EXCLUSION…
I too am sorry for the losses that were incurred, but each person living in the flood prone areas are aware of the risks they take. Some may not have taken them as seriously as they really are, but they knew there was a risk.
It’s beginning to look like we might need a signed checklist to show what the insured wants quoted. When the insured checks off each policy they would like a quote on, then they need to review each endorsement that could be attached to that particular policy & sign each with their acceptance or rejection, kinda like we had to do with TRIA, then we may have a chance in the courtroom with judges like this one.
Oh, by the way, I have another idea… stop all the government funding for anyone that lives in areas such as this… New Welfare Requirements — if you ain’t gonna work for your $ then you gotta move to El Paso or some place like that! If you wanna do for yourself, then you work hard & pay the bills for where you wanna be! But if you are not motivated then you get to live in apartments with no amenities, no pool, no washer & dryer in the unit, no covered parking for the Cadillac, you know… things that are not quote what they want but just enough to cover their needs… No food stamps either, you have to eat from the neighborhood slop kitchen or get motivated & do for yourself. If you get pregnant more than once on welfare you should have to get fixed so you don\’t keep breeding.
These ideas would sure solve some of the debt problems we have & perhaps not make it so easy for the lazy in society to mooch off the citizens that are willing to do the best they can for their families.
Ok, I’m off the soapbox…
Merry Christmas!