I don’t have a problem with insurance companies doing this.
If you don’t want to do what you’ve agreed to do to remain in compliance with the terms set forth in your policy, find another insurer.
I filed this under humor. This outraged homeowner thinks she owns the airspace above her home. Meaning that her home insurer must ask permission to fly over her home, to see if she is in compliance with her insurance policy.
Of course a smart insurance company will use drones to see what is going on.
“Lynne Schueler, from Massachusetts...:
-
I think I found the problem
ā But she was also concerned about how losing her insurance might impact her mortgage.ā
*******************************************************************
Things that make you goā¦āDUH!ā.
Seriously, I donāt see anything wrong with insurance companies wanting their policyholders to mitigate risks. I donāt need an insurance company to tell me those thingsā¦. I have a wife who āremindsā me when I should do things such as trim encroaching tree limbs.
The property appraiser of my Florida county uses aerial images of the county.
The postcards with offers to buy my house have a picture of my house on them.
When there is a hurricane, the federal government will fly over areas where damage can be expected.
Tree branches can really damage a roof.
A lot of insurance companies use Google Maps as they can zoom in on your property. My insurance company decided that my roof needed replacing and used that as an excuse to double my insurance bill. You can’t really tell how bad a roof is by looking at a satellite picture. I had a guy come out and give me an estimate for a new roof and he said my roof had several more years. I still opted for a metal roof over. Needless to say I dropped that insurance company and went with another that didn’t even need to come out and inspect anything.
I have had insurance company inspectors come to my house when I renewed my insurance or changed insurance providers.
Just because the insurance companies are now using drones to do the inspections does not seem to be anything different than using a person.
If the insurance company isn’t allowed to use drones itself, the insurance company will require you to use an outside party to verify roof condition - expect to pay $50 to $100, every year.
Power trips can be costly.
The insurance companies have to monitor homes because so many ignore routine maintenance on their homes. And drones aren’t needed because google earth does the job just fine.
When my insurance company questioned some tree branches over my house I realized they were right and got them removed immediately, then sent them the pictures. I even removed one tree entirely. The insurance company is basically doing you a favor by reminding you to take care of the issue. If you can’t afford to maintain your home get an apartment.
Full text of "Full Filing" for fiscal year ending Dec. 2023 United Policyholders, San Francisco
I don have a problem with insurance companies doing this, except they’ll pass the cost on to the insured. Are you ready to pay for aerial surveillance of your home and all that goes with it?
I had 30 year old shingles replaced on a house. Two contractors bid the job based on aerial photo that they ordered for $20.
If the homeowner has a problem with the insurer looking out for both the insurers interests and the homeowners interest - then the homeowner can find a new insurer.
Go find a new insurer and see how long your privacy principles last in the face of reality.
What makes her think it was a drone? Has she never seen the satellite image capabilities of Google?
I don’t like the idea of insurance companies spying on homeowners but this woman is no saint despite how the article tries to portray her. She was warned and given notice to trim the branches. She didn’t want to trim the branches because the tree was “beautiful.” But if one of those branches came down on the house, you can be damn sure she would have filed a claim.
My insurer posted a letter to me this year inquiring what a structureāa large wood frame shop / shed located in my backyard, was being used for. Ok, so I grew up in this house, the shop was built when I was freaking 10 years old.
Same company insured the house / property per my parents (I donāt know for how long), I liked how they treated them when we had a tornado or maybe straight line windstorm come through and blew trees down. Damaged a portion of the shop roof and busted up the west- facing fence. Paid out enough to fix the shop, new roof, fix the fence, no worries.
So why the inquiry about what the shop was being used for? Itās been a woodworking / power tool / lawn equipment / storage shed since inception. Did I forget Christmas š decorations?
Havenāt heard from them since my response a few months back. Except a letter stating they were adding an extra bit on my premium for wind / hail.
A pic from OOogle Earth showed my house with a large pen oak tree out front, vehicle in carport. I had the tree cut down in the spring, carpenter ants ate it and it had rotted out. So it werenāt there. Actually.
Or in the backyard where Iād face planted after Iād tripped over a partly-buried brick? Now that wouldāve been a laugh. There she is, laid out flat in the backyard. What would that letter of inquiry have been?
Would homeowners or Medicare kick in on that one?
Just thought the initial letter was a hoot.š¦
The fact she did not want to trim her tree away from her roof explains why insurance companies have to resort to invasive inspections.