Welcome to our Forum, where we invite your questions, comments, criticisms and ideas.

This Forum belongs to Florida Reinsurance Corporation (proposed)




 Home 


Level 0  Records: 3 | Currently: 3 - 1New Entry
 
3


Name:
Bryan (partyonthewater@gmail.com)
Date:Thu 19 Jun 2008 10:41:33 AM EDT
Subject:Flood
 

Debbie, there is no way they will wrap flood in with this program. Flood is Flood and it's a system that's really not broken and it is not that expensive. I agree that the issue of whether damage was caused by wind vs "rising" water (aka Katrina) needs to be more clearly defined.

To the original poster....while I agree that the current state leader is a moron and insurance companies are easy fodder and should not to blamed for past and present.....the proposal these people have outlined seems to be the "best way" to get the Allstates, State Farm's and Cincinnati's to come back and write Fire business and create competition.

Cheers.

 Post Reply
 
2


Name:
Debbie (luckydebbie2008@gmail.com)
Date:Tue 17 Jun 2008 01:48:55 PM EDT
Subject:storm surge
 

I would like to recommend a change to what your hurricane policy covers. First,
a little history. During Katrina houses were damaged by wind, rain driven water
and rising water. When homeowners tried to collect, they got the run-around.
The wind people claimed it was damage from flood, the flood people claimed it was
damage from wind and rain. If their policy was for all inclusive hurricane damage
they would have had a lot less red tape. (Red tape ends up costing big bucks).
Furthermore, a lot of people are in areas that don't flood during every large
rain storm, but are at risk if a category 4 or 5 hits the coast at just the right
time and angle to create storm surge that covers the entire area. Buying flood
insurance for this type of event is too costly for many of us. If hurricane flooding
was included as part of hurricane insurance, it would be a big help. Regular flood
insurance could drop hurricane flooding and so lower the cost for everyone with
just regular flood insurance (so they wouldn't have to pay twice).

 Post Reply | Display replies to this message (1)
 
1


Name:
cdfrog1 (cdfrog1@msn.com)
Date:Fri 06 Jun 2008 05:37:04 PM EDT
Subject:Insurance Crisis? You've got it all wrong -- PLEASE RESEARCH the FACTS and KNOW YOUR FLORIDA INSURANCE HISTORY
 

The profits they are talking about are not from Florida as they wish you to believe. They are from the whole country in all lines of insurance. The reality is that if Florida had to stand on its own there would not be any voluntary companies left. Business does not run from profit. The combine total that State Farm has paid since Andrew is over 8 Billion. That amount greatly exceeds the amount we have collected since we have insured properties in Florida.

That's assuming that we could keep all the premiums and not have to pay for operating our business and pay the non hurricane claims. I can give you the history of why we are in this position today and it is not the Insurance Industry's fault. It clearly is on the shoulders of the politicians' bad judgement, greed and desire to be re-elected since Andrew.

I would bet the person or persons who have this blog are politicians or financial idiots. The current reality is that Charlie and his minions in Tallahassee have created an environment that potentially will sink FLORIDA financially.

Let me frame it this way. How long would a dentist stay in business if the goverment forced him to charge fees that would be below cost and he had the risk of a tooth decay epedemic, indigenous to Florida, that would cost him millions of dollars. Would he continue to practice here? Would he expect all DENTISTS in the country to share in his cost? Would any business person do business this way?

They will not write about the cost that the tornadoes have created throughout the country and how that has affected the bottom line. I would be happy to debate any person the facts and realities of what has happened in Florida to create the problem we are in today.

 Post Reply | Display replies to this message (1)
 


 Home