Issues of Indemnity
Jan. 13th, 2006 04:43 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
weaktwosYou, the gentle reader, get to live vicariously through my adventures in Insurance Coverage.
I’ve been doing some analysis of my insurance coverage for my home in light of the fact that the recent flooding has affected a number of northern California folks with regard to flooding. Some folks in Vacaville were not in designated “flood planes”, but due to poor infrastructure, levees in our area and other “no-floodums” may suddenly turn low risk areas into high risk areas.
I’m still feeling lucky in Sacramento with regard to Earthquakes, so I’m still going to hang loose on that. But flood insurance. I’ll be getting flood insurance.
It is interesting to note that when you get flood insurance, there is a 30 day waiting period. I suppose this prevents the mindset of “Hey, it’s raining hard! Let me get coverage” and then promptly suffering a loss. So, if any of you are in a similar boat, be prepared for that. Flood Insurance is a government run policy, but many Insurance companies will broker it for you.
As a result of seeking a quote for flood insurance, the question of the replacement cost of my home came up. My policy is set to replace my dwelling for up to 125% of the value I insure it at. There is some adjustment for inflation from year to year on my policy. I originally insured the home for $113,000, as that was what it was appraised at. Remember this is not the same as the purchase price, which also includes the cost of the land upon which my home was built. With inflation, my humble little ‘ome was insured for 148,000. Given current housing costs, I didn’t think that was right. So I asked for a re-evaluation of the cost to replace my home, as I have not had that done for 6 years.
It’s a good thing I did. The evaluation came in at $177,000. That was within $8,000 of 125% of what my home was covered for. Thankfully, with my policy, my home would be replaced for 125% of that in the event of a total loss. Now I have some peace of mind, as well as the knowledge that I probably could wait about 7 years before evaluating my home’s replacement cost, barring any remodeling efforts of a significant value. The increase in coverage did give my insurance carrier an extra 100 bucks of my wages, though. But that’s okay, because being underinsured would suck if my house was flooded out or burned down (because of the Earthquake candle I keep well lit).
I’ve been doing some analysis of my insurance coverage for my home in light of the fact that the recent flooding has affected a number of northern California folks with regard to flooding. Some folks in Vacaville were not in designated “flood planes”, but due to poor infrastructure, levees in our area and other “no-floodums” may suddenly turn low risk areas into high risk areas.
I’m still feeling lucky in Sacramento with regard to Earthquakes, so I’m still going to hang loose on that. But flood insurance. I’ll be getting flood insurance.
It is interesting to note that when you get flood insurance, there is a 30 day waiting period. I suppose this prevents the mindset of “Hey, it’s raining hard! Let me get coverage” and then promptly suffering a loss. So, if any of you are in a similar boat, be prepared for that. Flood Insurance is a government run policy, but many Insurance companies will broker it for you.
As a result of seeking a quote for flood insurance, the question of the replacement cost of my home came up. My policy is set to replace my dwelling for up to 125% of the value I insure it at. There is some adjustment for inflation from year to year on my policy. I originally insured the home for $113,000, as that was what it was appraised at. Remember this is not the same as the purchase price, which also includes the cost of the land upon which my home was built. With inflation, my humble little ‘ome was insured for 148,000. Given current housing costs, I didn’t think that was right. So I asked for a re-evaluation of the cost to replace my home, as I have not had that done for 6 years.
It’s a good thing I did. The evaluation came in at $177,000. That was within $8,000 of 125% of what my home was covered for. Thankfully, with my policy, my home would be replaced for 125% of that in the event of a total loss. Now I have some peace of mind, as well as the knowledge that I probably could wait about 7 years before evaluating my home’s replacement cost, barring any remodeling efforts of a significant value. The increase in coverage did give my insurance carrier an extra 100 bucks of my wages, though. But that’s okay, because being underinsured would suck if my house was flooded out or burned down (because of the Earthquake candle I keep well lit).
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-01-14 02:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-14 07:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-14 03:37 am (UTC)Earthquakes, though. . . we're kinda close to the New Madrid Fault. The last time it went big time the Mississippi River ran backwards and the shock woke people up in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. They're predicting it'll go again before too long. I might should see what our homeowners insurance does for earthquakes. . .
no subject
Date: 2006-01-14 07:55 am (UTC)