Page 1 of 1
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 10:01 pm
by Dave_L
Watching the news with the floods up in Hull/Donny etc - many of the people aren't insured - is this a more widespread thing or have I misunderstood it?
Are they not insured contents-wise as they are in a flood risk area?
Surely the buildings are insured as *most* will be mortgaged??
If I wasn't insured and got flooded (Which is unlikely as we live fairly high up) I don't know where I'd start to rebuild my life, I'd be completely lost.
My thoughts go out to those affected.
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 10:26 pm
by flowjoe
I have found over the last 5 years more and more people telling us they are not insured (bricks & mortar) and they will pay themselves for repairs.
I know insurer`s only take you brass for things unlikely to happen, but i don`t think i would sleep at night without the basic cover.
Seen too many flood and subsidence claims, i have also noticed booking my own cover on-line how you can build you own policy, and of course the temptation is to cut the costs.
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:08 am
by Tony McC
The insurance companies haven't done themselves any favours by making obscene profits and paying their owners a king's ransom, combined with a truly awful level of service when you need to make a claim. While there will always be some householders that simply can't afford insurance, there are many who work on the "it'll never happen to me" principle. 
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 1:00 am
by matt h
many people who do have insurance make ludicrous claims every year, which only serves to bolster premiums. luckily the insurers do often prosecute when bogus claims are found out. In surers do however seem to look for any method of not paying claims. Recently i supported a genuine claimant whose chimney had moved and thus affected the outer walls etc. The insurers sent out ' surveyor' who claimed that it was due to inadequate roof support. There was more support inside that roofspace than any other property in the street, and since it was the chimney stack which had moved due to strong winds I questioned his qualifications... he just happened to be the chief loss adjuster for the brokers., and had no survey or building experience. I reported him to the ombudsman and lo and behold their claim was met in full, and the works carried out to my recommendations
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 5:01 pm
by lutonlagerlout
i had a client,whose 100FT wall blew down in the January gales,their claim was rejected as it was "wear and tear" according to the loss adjuster
basically, they are dogs
LLL
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 6:55 pm
by Ted
I wouldn't buy a house that wasn't on top of a hill these days generally...
Global warming and all!
Although the warming seems to have slowed this summer!
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:50 pm
by lutonlagerlout
as a builder whenever i have bought houses i have always aimed for a house where the garden gently slopes away from the house and on top of a hill rather than the bottom.
ppl go on about south facing gardens but if your garden is over 40 ft it makes no difference anyway
LLL
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:05 pm
by Mikey_C
My thoughts go out to any of the people affected by the flooding, the upheaval and inconvenienced caused, especially to those with young families and little or no friends and family support near by must be immense.
Those with insurance will now start an uphill battle to get their claim settled, with most insures trying to weasel out of any part or all of a claim they can.
Then when the insures have paid out, those throughout the country who pay insurance will face a hike in premiums, to make sure Mr Insurer still makes a profit this year.
Enter rant mode.
However, what really gets me wound up is the suggestion of the government bailing out (USING MY TAXES 
) people who ‘choose’ not to get insurance! (and it is a choice as all insurance companies send you a renewal each year that says if you do nothing your insurance will continue and they will just take payment in the same way they did last year, in case you forget) after all the government wouldn’t turn up at my house with cheque, if I got burgled or had a fire.
Exit rant mode
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:18 pm
by Dave_L
Agree with ya, Mikey - why the hell should the Government help those without cover?
I think the general street and infrastructure clean up/reinstatement *might* need some central help though.
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:06 am
by lutonlagerlout
i feel for those people too dave,but look at new orleans, a lot of it has been abandonded
house insurance is not that expensive==>compared to the fiver a day on fags, that a lot of folks who claim they cant afford insurance, smoke.
anyway its a crime but whos gonna pay??
big question
LLL
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:55 am
by matt h
this weather keeps up and we'll be needin to remortgage to afford the insurance premiums...after all think of all those poor shareholders... them as would be getting less for a change this year... bet they claw it back with interest next year:(
) people who ‘choose’ not to get insurance! (and it is a choice as all insurance companies send you a renewal each year that says if you do nothing your insurance will continue and they will just take payment in the same way they did last year, in case you forget) after all the government wouldn’t turn up at my house with cheque, if I got burgled or had a fire.