Insurance Premiums, Risk and floods

[Pushka]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

So when does looking after one's self come into play? I've had insurance ever since I moved out of home. Have claimed a couple of times and generally been fortunate that I haven't had a major calamity such as flood or fire directly affect me. However, if it did then I'd be fine.

What annoys me is people who refuse to buy insurance then expect others to give them everything to recoup their loss. If they didn't think their house, possessions etc weren't worth insuring well, you took the risk and effectively 'self insured' then you get to wear the loss.

I agree with that. But when the Victorian fires occurred, those people who had insurance claimed on that, those people who didn't received a lot more money from the government and fund raisIng. Thereby reinforcing the notion that if you don't bother to insure then the govt will come along and fix it up.

Its like people who travel overseas without travel insurance, then they break a leg, then cry to the media and expect the govt to fly them home and pay their '000's medical bill.

 

[TheEmu]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

No. The global economy will collapse.

But here is another thought. Why don't people who need flood cover pay for it themselves instead of expecting everyone else to cover for them?


I work for an insurance company and my parents also had a ~$150 increase on a $950 premium. Pretty hefty increase....

We checked the flood records before we bought where we are and there had not been any flood water near the property for as long as records have been kept. Didn't stop our previous insurer deciding to up our premium from $2360.16 (2011) to $19,800.24 (2012) while changing their PDS with some fairly rubbery wording in regard to water damage. Naturally enough we found a new insurer - one that focuses on a much more defined market with a clearly-worded policy. (I spent nearly 10 years in the industry so I can read a PDS.)

 

[equus]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Someone else, I think here on AFF, has mentioned that they specifically do not want to pay more thanks to flood (or fire or cyclone) payouts, so they have found and use an insurer that doesn't offer flood cover in risky areas.

That was probably me . Specifically, I was looking to pay for my own risk - which is not flood based (i don't need flood cover). Any insurer which covers flood on any property will have everybody covering the risk to a degree (the common pool concept), even if the contributions vary enormously due to the different risks.

The big catch if flood coverage is offered, is that regardless of the differential pricing, when an event occurs, payouts result. If the premiums were not enough to cover, then everything goes up. It is no good for the insurer to simply up the food risk based component only, as then people leave, and they have to raise money somehow - so everyone ends up paying more.

My solution to this was to find an insurer that does not cover flood period. (unlike the vast reaction to the 2011 event to include it for everyone - and charge accordingly). They also reject outright things that they deem a high risk - thus reducing the premium differentials, and the probability of having to cross-subsidise.

It is worth noting that this cuts two ways (I am happy to cherry pick). With 3 properties to insure, 2 are at no risk of flood - so they have been moved. The third, however, is waterfront, on a canal connected to a main river - that remains with the insurer that offers flood coverage.

 

[drron]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Just reporting in from Bundaberg.The main town is recovering well.Have not wanted to go over to North Bundaberg as the locals are obviously annoyed with the number of sightseers getting in the way.From tomorrow both bridges over the river will be fully operational.Gas supply may be back by Friday-still a lot of takeaways closed-particularly kebab places and fish and chip shops.Those that are open have much slower service.
Accommodation is limited due to all the workers helping with the cleanup and reconstruction.

 

[JessicaTam]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Just reporting in from Bundaberg.The main town is recovering well.Have not wanted to go over to North Bundaberg as the locals are obviously annoyed with the number of sightseers getting in the way.From tomorrow both bridges over the river will be fully operational.Gas supply may be back by Friday-still a lot of takeaways closed-particularly kebab places and fish and chip shops.Those that are open have much slower service.
Accommodation is limited due to all the workers helping with the cleanup and reconstruction.

Thanks for the update. Bundaberg has dropped off the media focus since the all the good footage has been used.

 

[k_sheep]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

There's plenty of flood-related bugs (of the microbiological kind) still turning up in SEQ. Keep out of the water if you're got cuts people! Salt water doesn't clean wounds when there's flood water carrying sewerage and livestock bits flowing into it ...