Insurance is a risk game...
Crazy fires in Los Angeles
- Thread starter bingham67
- Start date
Caporegime
You cannot expect the insurance companies to cover this. They can't. They work on risk so when the risk is too large they get out. Theres no way to insure against this. Caveat emptor. This is the future. Climate change will cause issues like this across the world and we have two choices. Put trillions into preventative measures which will be wildly unpopular with most people outside of these areas considering most of the first world has a cost of living issue and government that have no money. The other option is you move away from these places. Abandon them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Posts
- 2,751
There's the odd house left standing, completely untouched. I've been thinking about them. They now live in a waste land and their house is probably worthless. Even if insured they won't get a pay out as i'm not sure any cover would be for house devaluing due to neighbourhood getting wiped out.
At the very least they face years of upheaval as the place around them is rebuilt. I doubt they will abandon those areas, not until it happens again anyway.
Associate
It depends if they are selling insurance with fire cover. It sounds like the perfect insurance company. Take the peoples money but when it comes time to pay out claim bankruptcy!
Soldato
It isn't nuclear fallout!
Caporegime
If they have insured the property then they will pay out. There are levels and levels of insurance so its unlikely these companies will go bankrupt. The issue is when you force them to insure properties which shouldn't be insured. Its the same with any sort of insurances. A company might insure an 18 year old on a sports care. They know the risk though and price it accordingly. A while back there was a big hoo ha with Land Rovers because you couldn't get them insured.
Loads of insurance companies were dropping people in this area over the past few years as far as I understand. I would suggest for just this reason. It makes no sense to insure someone on a $3m house if theres a good chance you will have to pay out at any point on more than the very very rare occasion. And by that I mean you insure 200 houses and 1 burns down occasionally. If there is a remote chance that you insure 200 houses and they all burn down at once then you cannot mitigate the risk.
Correct, no damage to house, no payout.
So yes their house will have no value until the area has been rebuilt. Additionally it's likely their house currently has no water or electricity and may not have for sometime.
The home owners only hope is that the state or government is generous and offers to buy their house from them at its pre fire value
Last edited:
So latest data at the time I posted was 14% and 33% contained, probably a little more now, similar number still fighting the fire.