Surge vs wind in the eyes of insurance companies

[hurricanetrack]

Ok- here is the question from me after seeing all that I have seen in the wake of Katrina- plus a phone call from a visitor to my site.

As far as insurance companies are concerned, does storm surge flooding, or flooding in general, have damage priority over wind damage?

Let's say that we could prove that 33% of the homes destroyed in Waveland or BSL were damaged beyond repair by wind BEFORE the storm surge came in. Should the insurance companies that have covered these said homes/businesses for any amount of time be required to pay as if the wind did the damage and not the surge? Even though a surge came in and plowed these buildings into piles of junk a mile away- if we could prove (that is to say the home or business owner could prove) that the wind all but destroyed the building before the surge did- then why not pay up the claim?

I realize that storm surge flooding caused most of the enormous damage we have all come to know via images in the wake of Katrina. But some people might very well have a legit claim that the wind did some portion of that damage before the water rose. Especially in the cases of trees falling on homes. I would like to see people who paid in their hard earned money be treated fairly.

In addition, more education about the financial disaster that looms in the wake of a hurricane is in dire need. People generally respond to issues involving their bank account. To be sure, more can be done to pass on the lessons learned from all major hurricane disasters to help people better prepare financially.

[f5]

the insurance companies know that a CAT 3 can't produce that kind of damage.in other to gwet that kind of damage with wind.you have to have at least 165 +mph sustained winds

[Derek Ortt]

I would have to say that 95% of the damage was surge related. The only way to show that that wind did some of the damage beyond a reasonable doubt, would be to have a video record of the wind doing the damage, since surge is a very plasuable reason for nearly all of the damage

[Ixolib]

I would have to say that 95% of the damage was surge related. The only way to show that that wind did some of the damage beyond a reasonable doubt, would be to have a video record of the wind doing the damage, since surge is a very plasuable reason for nearly all of the damage

While there is no doubt that wind damage does, in fact, exist - as you said, the damage from Katrina was/is primarily surge-related.

Lots of folks, however, are still holding out in the hope that somehow they can convince their insurance companies differently. IMO, the insurance companies are going to win the majority of those battles. There is just limited - if any - evidence of the kinds of winds that would be necessary to cause the damage some are claiming... In my case, it just wasn't worth the time and effort to fight a loosing battle, so I settled for the best I could get. Of course, no flood insurance here, so needless to say the settlement didn't come close to the reality.

But I've got flood insurance now - just a day late and a dollar short!!

[hurricanetrack]

Question- if you don't mind answering. With the flood insurance you now have, how much does it cost and what would be the process for filing a claim should the worst happen again? Do you know how easy/hard it is to do this? Is it covering 100% of your home and its valuables? I always wondered about flood insurance and whether or not it is worth having when it comes time to file a claim. Let's look at it this way- what if everyone in Waveland or BSL or New Orleans had it, there would seemingly be no problems in paying out claims since it was almost all flood damage. Of course, whether or not there is money there to fund such payouts is another story. I was just curious since I have never needed flood insurance.

[Ixolib]

Question- if you don't mind answering. With the flood insurance you now have, how much does it cost and what would be the process for filing a claim should the worst happen again? Do you know how easy/hard it is to do this? Is it covering 100% of your home and its valuables? I always wondered about flood insurance and whether or not it is worth having when it comes time to file a claim. Let's look at it this way- what if everyone in Waveland or BSL or New Orleans had it, there would seemingly be no problems in paying out claims since it was almost all flood damage. Of course, whether or not there is money there to fund such payouts is another story. I was just curious since I have never needed flood insurance.

As I sit right now, I'm not really sure of the exact premium cost. But I do know it was relatively insignificant - most probably the reason why I don't know.

I have been kicking myself in the butt ever since Katrina for NOT having it then - especially when I consider the premium cost compared to my actual loss, which thus far has come to nearly $35K - and that's with ME doing ALL the repairs myself. But since we are at 20 feet above MSL, the concept of flood insurance seemed so distant. As with you, I "never needed" flood insurance in the past. I now have a whole different viewpoint on that perspective...

Your points about communities having the insurance are valid. "IF" they/we would have had the insurance, the result now would be entirely different. But then again, with that said, certain other issues enter the picture - like your windstorm carrier not covering things they should or vice versa. Many arguments are still underway for those who had both windstorm and flood insurance as one doesn't want to cover what they think the other should be taking care of. A lot of mess to be untangled, no doubt...

Anyway, here's a few links that offer a lot of info on the program - including the costs involved, deductibles, etc.

Overview: http://www.fema.gov/pdf/nfip/summary_cov.pdf

Premium Estimator: http://www.floodsmart.gov/floodsmart/static/quickquoteres.html

Quick Quote & Info: http://www.floodsmart.gov/floodsmart/pages/prp.jsp

[HollynLA]

I live in an AE flood zone, although it hasn't flooded here in the 23 years that my house has stood. That premium estimator is total bunk. We are in the 3rd category for rates and we pay about $600/year for 90K for structure only, no contents with a $500 deductible.

[Jim Cantore]

Ok- here is the question from me after seeing all that I have seen in the wake of Katrina- plus a phone call from a visitor to my site.

As far as insurance companies are concerned, does storm surge flooding, or flooding in general, have damage priority over wind damage?

Let's say that we could prove that 33% of the homes destroyed in Waveland or BSL were damaged beyond repair by wind BEFORE the storm surge came in. Should the insurance companies that have covered these said homes/businesses for any amount of time be required to pay as if the wind did the damage and not the surge? Even though a surge came in and plowed these buildings into piles of junk a mile away- if we could prove (that is to say the home or business owner could prove) that the wind all but destroyed the building before the surge did- then why not pay up the claim?

I realize that storm surge flooding caused most of the enormous damage we have all come to know via images in the wake of Katrina. But some people might very well have a legit claim that the wind did some portion of that damage before the water rose. Especially in the cases of trees falling on homes. I would like to see people who paid in their hard earned money be treated fairly.

In addition, more education about the financial disaster that looms in the wake of a hurricane is in dire need. People generally respond to issues involving their bank account. To be sure, more can be done to pass on the lessons learned from all major hurricane disasters to help people better prepare financially.

You were there Mark, If this was so your video could help, problem was the surge and the strongest winds were at about the same time, now damage on top of 3-4+ story buildings are 90% likely wind related.

Cat 3 winds are worse then People think, Use an F2 tornado for example, that can cause quite a bit of damage.

[Jim Cantore]

Question- if you don't mind answering. With the flood insurance you now have, how much does it cost and what would be the process for filing a claim should the worst happen again? Do you know how easy/hard it is to do this? Is it covering 100% of your home and its valuables? I always wondered about flood insurance and whether or not it is worth having when it comes time to file a claim. Let's look at it this way- what if everyone in Waveland or BSL or New Orleans had it, there would seemingly be no problems in paying out claims since it was almost all flood damage. Of course, whether or not there is money there to fund such payouts is another story. I was just curious since I have never needed flood insurance.

Wow your lucky, even Floyd spared you the flooding

You live on higher ground I assume

[f5]

since the insurance companies only pay for wind only did homestead residents get easy claims after Andrew since it was all wind?

[yzerfan]

We recently got a letter from our insurance agent saying that even though we're in neither a surge zone nor a flood plain, we're now eligible for flood insurance. You get to pick the coverage level- I want to say that $250K of coverage would run us about $315/year.

I'm on the fence about it right now. On one hand, I guess the peace of mind would be nice, but we're also a couple miles inland, and our neighborhood is 40-50 feet above mean sea level, with our house at about 45 feet, and our neighborhood also still drains well when we get 20 inches of rain in a 24 hour period of time.

[frederic79]

Here's another question on the insurance topic. I am preparing to fight my insurance company over their refusal to cover sewer backup. I have an "Option R" on my policy which includes coverage up to $5,000 for damages relating to sewer backup. It is detailed as a separage dollar amount on my premium, albeit very little. This option is only excluded if there is "negligence on the owner's part" or the policy is brand new. There is even a separate $1,000 deductible for this. So when I show them that the toilets and bathtubs backed up and overflowed during the storm, they use a line the general policy that denies coverage for damage of this nature because it occured during the storm and therefore is tied to floodwater. Actually the power went off and shut down the pumping stations that prevents this. What gets me is general policy itself denies coverage for sewer backup, but the rider (using the same exact language) includes coverage. The insurance folks finally told me "Hey, if we made an exception and paid you, we'd have to do it for everyone else." Translated... if we did the right thing for you we'd have to do it for everyone else. I'll be going to Hattiesburg for an arbitration meeting with them May 11 unless anything changes...
anyone else run into this?

[Jim Cantore]

you could see why they dont want to cover surge damage

Storm Category Major effect

1900 4 Surge
1926 4 Surge
1928 4 Surge
1935 5 Wind/Surge
1938 3 Surge
Donna 4 Surge
Betsy 3 Surge/Flooding
Camille 5 Surge
Frederic 3 Surge
Hugo 4 Surge
Andrew 5 Wind
Opal 3 Surge
Floyd 2 Flooding
Isabel 2 Surge
Charley 4 Wind
Frances 2 Flooding
Ivan 3 Surge
Jeanne 3 Flooding
Dennis 3 Surge
Katrina 3-4 SURGE!
Rita 3 Surge
Wilma 3 Wind

No wonder

[Ixolib]

you could see why they dont want to cover surge damage

Storm Category Major effect
Katrina 3-4 SURGE!

Interesting method of showing exclamation!!

[Jim Cantore]

you could see why they dont want to cover surge damage

Storm Category Major effect
Katrina 3-4 SURGE!

Interesting method of showing exclamation!!

its still an understatement

[Ixolib]

you could see why they dont want to cover surge damage

Storm Category Major effect
Katrina 3-4 SURGE!

Interesting method of showing exclamation!!

its still an understatement

Agree... There is perhaps no true method of relating that result in a textual format - or any other format for that matter.

BTW - Did anybody see Oprah today? She had Anderson Cooper in N.O. and Lisa Ling on our coast to "tell the story that nobody else is telling".

Even though she mispronounced Pass Christian and DeLisle ( ), it was not a bad hour of TV in my opinion...

http://www2.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/200602/tows_past_20060221.jhtml

[Jim Cantore]

I dont know why I just find Oprah a bit annoying

[Ixolib]

I dont know why I just find Oprah a bit annoying

Yeah, I agree.... Certainly not a fan here, but the stuff she's doing for Katrina - in getting the word out and helping some of those in dire straits - is pretty good.

[tndefender]

Question- if you don't mind answering. With the flood insurance you now have, how much does it cost and what would be the process for filing a claim should the worst happen again? Do you know how easy/hard it is to do this? Is it covering 100% of your home and its valuables? I always wondered about flood insurance and whether or not it is worth having when it comes time to file a claim. Let's look at it this way- what if everyone in Waveland or BSL or New Orleans had it, there would seemingly be no problems in paying out claims since it was almost all flood damage. Of course, whether or not there is money there to fund such payouts is another story. I was just curious since I have never needed flood insurance.

Enough money to fund such payouts? Check this out and then ask yourself that question: http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php ... Itemid=182

[Jim Cantore]

I dont know why I just find Oprah a bit annoying

Yeah, I agree.... Certainly not a fan here, but the stuff she's doing for Katrina - in getting the word out and helping some of those in dire straits - is pretty good.

thats more then CNN was doing