There was a big huff about Allstate after the San Diego brush fires. Allstate actually called out the Counties and State about their inadequate fire response to the areas, and said they would not cover another catastrophe like that and that the San Diego area needed to step up with their fire departments, radio coverage, etc.
A lot in California ripped on Allstate, but after reading the post incident reports on the failure of the radio systems, and staffing, and all the other problems associated with those firestorms the insurance company's response made sense. If you permit building of homes in the outskirts without upgrading the public safety infrastructure, you are planning on failure.
That's interesting and makes sense on Allstates part. But i was referring to arson as a means of circumventing the "no flood coverage" clause.