Posted on 12/16/2005 4:33:38 AM PST by WKB
GULFPORT - U.S. Sen. Trent Lott and wife Tricia are suing State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. over its refusal to cover the loss of their Pascagoula home to Hurricane Katrina.
The Lotts' suit, filed today in U.S. District Court, accuses the insurance company of fraud for denying coverage based on a "flood" exemption and asks that the court order the claim paid. It further asks that the insurance company be prohibited from using the flood exemption to deny coverage.
Attorney Richard "Dickie" Scruggs is representing his sister and brother-in-law in the lawsuit.
The Lotts paid insurance premiums for more than 40 years, according to the lawsuit, believing they would be covered for all losses caused by a hurricane. Katrina left a slab where their waterfront home once stood.
Homeowner's insurance policies in Mississippi and other states cover wind damage but typically include language to exclude flood damage, whether or not it is caused by wind-driven water.
The lawsuit argues that the storm surge was part of the hurricane and can't be considered flooding. It also points out that, under established law in Mississippi, when wind is considered to the "proximate" cause of damage, a claim should be paid even if other factors contributed to the loss.
Dear Miss Marple,
"Therre was no reasonable reason for those people to have flood insurance, but they lost everything, and the insurance companies are trying to weasel out of those people's coverage as well."
Indeed. In fact, when I purchased my current house and spoke to my insurance agent about my new homeowners policy, I specifically asked about flood insurance. It is unavailable through regular insurance companies, he told me. You have to get it from the Feds. I said, okay, how do I do that? Because you're not in a 100-year or 200-year (I forget specifically) flood plain, you're not eligible for the federal program.
Like you, I took the rider for earthquakes (even though I live in an area that hasn't been hit hard by a major quake in centuries).
But flood insurance is unavailable - at any price - to me.
sitetest
You are correct. I rode the storm out in Pascagoula and could see the surge coming from about a mile away. I was nine miles from the coast.
I beg to differ. ANY storm that wipes out New Orleans, Bayou LeBatre, Alabama and EVERYTHING in between is a freak!
Better?
I'm sure someone else has already told you this, but this person is his brother-in-law.
That would be his sister's husband...
Being from Houston, I have been in many, many floods. During Katrina I was nine miles inland in Pascagoula. I saw the surge coming about a mile away. It was surreal. I was scared. Definitely not the same as a flood.
I can see where a policy might not consider it different and I have no sympathy for folks that could afford flood insurance and chose not to. My beef is with the situations where folks were not eligible for the insurance due to not being in a flood zone but were still wiped out by the surge. i.e. three foot of SALT water in homes 12 miles inland. In these cases the insurance companies should pay, IMO.
Much!
Whoops! Or his wife's brother...
(Got carried away with sarcasm, sorry)
Thank you for the link. I am living at Shingle Mill Landing on the Escatawpa River.
From what I understand, everyone is eligible to purchase flood insurance, not just those in flood zones. Now a person may not be able to purchase the government backed flood policies, but I have been told that private will insurance companies will write the policies regardless of whether the property is within a flood zone.
Howlin, could you verify if what I wrote above is correct?
Secondly, why should an insurance company have to pay for damage if there was no policy in place to cover it? Would it make sense to expect your auto insurance to replace your car if you only had liability insurance?
My neighbor across the street got one check for the flood damage and another for the wind damage. Guess some companies are better than others.
Yeah, a guy, no matter who he is, pays premiums for 40 years and expects the insurance company to make good on their policy.
The son of a bitch. Who does he think he is???
I cannot possibly see how.
A similar event hasn't happened for many many years;
Not in the history of weather keeping.
in a way it's as if our civilization along the Gulf Coast grew up without having to think about or consider such a catastrophe.
I lived in Gulfport in 1969 when Camille roared through. That storm has been called the "Storm of the Century". It has been used as the benchmark ever since. Here in Pascagoula there was no widespread destruction.
But my opinion, fwiw, is that the knowledge was there for those who knew to seek it out.
I cannot reach this same conclusion.
Anybody in the United States can buy flood insurance.
Home Owners insurance pays for the damage "from the flood line up."
Neither can many people. Nevertheless, it is known, and has been known for some time, how powerful hurricanes can get, how large the diameter of hurricane force winds can be, how high a surge can be, and how these things could affect the Gulf coast.
Katrina is not even the worst case scenario, far from it. It could have been worse. Camille, while exceptionally powerful, was a small in diameter storm.
None of this is even arguable.
See post #341. There have been several on this thread that have stated the same thing.
Trent is an only child, so it wouild be his wife's brother.
Trent Lott should be ashamed for his lawsuit.
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.