Posted on 12/31/2024 6:40:53 AM PST by vespa300
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Insurance companies that stopped providing home coverage to hundreds of thousands of Californians in recent years as wildfires became more destructive will have to again provide policies in fire-prone areas if they want to keep doing business in California under a state regulation announced Monday.
The rule will require home insurers to offer coverage in high-risk areas, something the state has never done, Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara's office said in a statement. Insurers will have to start increasing their coverage by 5% every two years until they hit the equivalent of 85% of their market share. That means if an insurer writes 20 out of every 100 state policies, they'd need to write 17 in a high-risk area, Lara's office said.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
So in reality they will make home ownership even more unlikely.
Notice they will not fix thier policies that actually make such wildfires more likely.
LL Cool J was right!
I’m sure that will keep the rates down. /sarc
hahaha....yep.
Little do they know, without people managing the land, its biodiversity is toast and the result will be mass extinctions of locally adapted alleles.
Lots.
5% increase in coverage with accompanying 10% increase in premiums. ( + 10% fee to the right “big guy”)
The “wildfires” will cease once the pesky middle-class are driven out of California.
“20....17”
Here in Florida, going without homeowners insurance is common.
The answer is simple, as an insurer, don’t do business in CA.
Actually, the insurane companies will now get to pass along the cost of “reinsurance” to the consumer. Under this law. They had never been allowed to do that before. So policies on the poor shmuck who lives in California could go up by as much as 40%. Win win for Newsome and the Insurance companies.
The California Homeowner has to bend over though......again.
This *has* to be one of the subsections of Directive 10-289 from “Atlas Shrugged”.
https://theexplanationproject.fandom.com/wiki/Directive_10-289
How about making environmentalists who prevented the cleaning up of dead trees and brush that encourages wild fires pay for all the damage caused by wild fires?
…Insurers will soon require that California go get bent.
Insurers will just leave California.
Then what?
I would actually be surprised if there isn’t also language in the law to regulate premium increases or maximums.
Yep.
My friend found out her area is now considered a “fire zone” by her insurance company - she’s lived in her home for 40 years and has never been near any wildfires. Her home insurer dropped her - she wants to sell her home and is now wondering if her home is salable. She’s searching for an insurance company now.
My own insurance shot up this past year - my neighbor called his insurer b/c his rate had increased by so much, he’d never filed a claim in 30 years - the insurance company told him there were so many claims after devastating fires in the state that they had to raise everyone’s rates.
If the state is going to require the low risk areas to subsidize the high risk areas, the insurers should leave the state.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.