Why is it that people in this country suddenly feel that personal responsibility is no longer a worth while trait and that we should all look to the big government to take care of us because we do not know how to. The fact is that we do know how to, some just choose NOT to. I feel great pain for those affected by the storms, including my family in the Florida Keys that are getting bashed at this minute by Rita. But they evacuated when told, took precautions and have insurance as needed.
They are not looking to FEMA or any other government handout for recovery. I understand some people can’t afford it, and I am all for charitable organizations and for people giving from their heart, I am NOT for federal government action to rebuild these peoples lives and houses. This is as close to socialism as it gets, when the masses look to the leaders to tell them what to do, you wind up with a poor outcome and a larger expense than necessary. If you choose to live 10 feet below sea level and you choose to NOT buy flood insurance which was available to every one in the affected areas, you took a gamble, there are no mulligans, redo’s, and no apoligies needed, I love the old saying that “Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part” You must live with the decisions in life that you make.
Better not let Garamendi out here in California get wind of this. He will be sure to tell all the people that their HO policies will cover in the event of an EQ no matter what just to help him get elected to Lt. Governor next year.
You must the richest person in the US. You choose where you want to live? You don’t worry about having a job or even a car? You can afford to buy a new house at any time in any area?
The “you made your bed now sleep in it” attitude towards the NOLA poor is pathetic and unethical. We have a societal responsibility for all Americans. If we let people fall through the cracks we lose efficiency as a society and as an economy. We also lose moral high ground with the world.
On the subject of the article:
The wind-driven argument is important. It will help us understand our policies and learn how to write them and underwrite more efficiently and accurately.
Look, I do coverage work and I can assure you that we use every technical aspect of the policy language to pull coverage. Where the policy laguage is vague or over-borad regarding exclusions (e.g., causation on flooding) we all lose.
Stop demonizing those in need and the leaders trying to help them. You’re not doing any good for the country or the industry.
What better definition of Flood is there than “house gutted by 6 to 10 ft of water”?
Your agent probably meant you did not need a flood policy to close the loan, because the property is not in a Special Flood Hazard Area. He would have been fool hardy to tell you that you would never ever flood. Don’t take insurance advice from builders, realtors, or neighbors.
In my experience, no homeowner, with a house in a location as you described, would voluntarily buy flood insurance. Because their neighbor, realtor, and contractor told them.
Now, be honest, knowing your house is 20 miles inland, 5 miles from the nearest water, etc, etc, would you have purchase a flood policy willingly? I am willing to bet the answer is NO.
The recall would apply to more than just Democrats, my friend. Unfortunately, stupidity about how insurance works; heck, how the real world works, is a bi-partisan issue. And, not all of these people are actually as dumb as the act.
The fact is that knowledge of how insurance works doesn’t negate the need to look like you are doing something, anything, for the voters; no matter how stupid or ill-advised. Whenever disaster strikes, you can always count on politicians and attorneys to attack the insurance industry and the oil industry. Yet, in the end, we always find out that neither acted badly, as an industry, before the disaster, nor during the recovery. But, sure as the sun rises in the east, as the next disaster roles into town, the blame game starts up again.
The unfortunate thing is that the result should be akin to the little boy who cried wolf (without the bad ending); after a while, people just stop hearing and believing. Incredibly, however, the result of the constant unfounded accusations, because they are repeated so often by such “high-minded” persons, is that people who should know better start believing the accusations. And soon, if they are repeated enough, accusations become fact to the people who don’t know any better.
Our political leaders should treat us better than that, but they don’t. Too often, in local and state elections, demagoguery is the name of the game. It’s what wins votes, and keeps them in power. So, you see, it’s not really about what’s best for us, or best for the economy; it’s all about them.
Umm, it looks like a few people on this board don’t know much about insurance law, either.
Two points:
1. The consumer is also entitled to rely on the language of the policy. Improper or vague underwriting is the insurer’s fault, every time.
2. That flooding caused the damage to particular property is not the only legal question here. Causation (and proximate causation, to boot) is a many-headed Hydra, people. No pun intended.
Sometimes the view from the carrier’s office is a little far from reality, and policy language means a lot of different things to different people. You can’t deny that the wind-driven water argument will be one of the toughest coverage issues this year; it’s a good argument from a legal perspective, and I’m looking forward to seeing the results.
You must be the brightest guy on Jim Hood’s legal team.
Both HO3 and NFIP policy language make it quite clear that causation of flood is irrelevant. Did sea water/lake water/bayou water get pushed into your house? If the result is FLOOD, then look to your FLOOD policy for recovery!
I’m glad you don’t run my insurance company–it will go bankrupt pdq and my claims (other than flood, that is) won’t get paid.
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.
Why is it that people in this country suddenly feel that personal responsibility is no longer a worth while trait and that we should all look to the big government to take care of us because we do not know how to. The fact is that we do know how to, some just choose NOT to. I feel great pain for those affected by the storms, including my family in the Florida Keys that are getting bashed at this minute by Rita. But they evacuated when told, took precautions and have insurance as needed.
They are not looking to FEMA or any other government handout for recovery. I understand some people can’t afford it, and I am all for charitable organizations and for people giving from their heart, I am NOT for federal government action to rebuild these peoples lives and houses. This is as close to socialism as it gets, when the masses look to the leaders to tell them what to do, you wind up with a poor outcome and a larger expense than necessary. If you choose to live 10 feet below sea level and you choose to NOT buy flood insurance which was available to every one in the affected areas, you took a gamble, there are no mulligans, redo’s, and no apoligies needed, I love the old saying that “Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part” You must live with the decisions in life that you make.
Taylor is probably congratulating himself for such a brilliant brainstorm. Ah, the small minds of politician.
Better not let Garamendi out here in California get wind of this. He will be sure to tell all the people that their HO policies will cover in the event of an EQ no matter what just to help him get elected to Lt. Governor next year.
Not going for it…
You must the richest person in the US. You choose where you want to live? You don’t worry about having a job or even a car? You can afford to buy a new house at any time in any area?
The “you made your bed now sleep in it” attitude towards the NOLA poor is pathetic and unethical. We have a societal responsibility for all Americans. If we let people fall through the cracks we lose efficiency as a society and as an economy. We also lose moral high ground with the world.
On the subject of the article:
The wind-driven argument is important. It will help us understand our policies and learn how to write them and underwrite more efficiently and accurately.
Look, I do coverage work and I can assure you that we use every technical aspect of the policy language to pull coverage. Where the policy laguage is vague or over-borad regarding exclusions (e.g., causation on flooding) we all lose.
Stop demonizing those in need and the leaders trying to help them. You’re not doing any good for the country or the industry.
How about a retro-active recall of all Democrats who have no knowledge of how insurance works.
What better definition of Flood is there than “house gutted by 6 to 10 ft of water”?
Your agent probably meant you did not need a flood policy to close the loan, because the property is not in a Special Flood Hazard Area. He would have been fool hardy to tell you that you would never ever flood. Don’t take insurance advice from builders, realtors, or neighbors.
In my experience, no homeowner, with a house in a location as you described, would voluntarily buy flood insurance. Because their neighbor, realtor, and contractor told them.
Now, be honest, knowing your house is 20 miles inland, 5 miles from the nearest water, etc, etc, would you have purchase a flood policy willingly? I am willing to bet the answer is NO.
The recall would apply to more than just Democrats, my friend. Unfortunately, stupidity about how insurance works; heck, how the real world works, is a bi-partisan issue. And, not all of these people are actually as dumb as the act.
The fact is that knowledge of how insurance works doesn’t negate the need to look like you are doing something, anything, for the voters; no matter how stupid or ill-advised. Whenever disaster strikes, you can always count on politicians and attorneys to attack the insurance industry and the oil industry. Yet, in the end, we always find out that neither acted badly, as an industry, before the disaster, nor during the recovery. But, sure as the sun rises in the east, as the next disaster roles into town, the blame game starts up again.
The unfortunate thing is that the result should be akin to the little boy who cried wolf (without the bad ending); after a while, people just stop hearing and believing. Incredibly, however, the result of the constant unfounded accusations, because they are repeated so often by such “high-minded” persons, is that people who should know better start believing the accusations. And soon, if they are repeated enough, accusations become fact to the people who don’t know any better.
Our political leaders should treat us better than that, but they don’t. Too often, in local and state elections, demagoguery is the name of the game. It’s what wins votes, and keeps them in power. So, you see, it’s not really about what’s best for us, or best for the economy; it’s all about them.
You hit the nail in the head. Now if only someone can hammer some sense into these politicians’ heads.
Umm, it looks like a few people on this board don’t know much about insurance law, either.
Two points:
1. The consumer is also entitled to rely on the language of the policy. Improper or vague underwriting is the insurer’s fault, every time.
2. That flooding caused the damage to particular property is not the only legal question here. Causation (and proximate causation, to boot) is a many-headed Hydra, people. No pun intended.
Sometimes the view from the carrier’s office is a little far from reality, and policy language means a lot of different things to different people. You can’t deny that the wind-driven water argument will be one of the toughest coverage issues this year; it’s a good argument from a legal perspective, and I’m looking forward to seeing the results.
You must be the brightest guy on Jim Hood’s legal team.
Both HO3 and NFIP policy language make it quite clear that causation of flood is irrelevant. Did sea water/lake water/bayou water get pushed into your house? If the result is FLOOD, then look to your FLOOD policy for recovery!
I’m glad you don’t run my insurance company–it will go bankrupt pdq and my claims (other than flood, that is) won’t get paid.