Florida homeowner rates could skyrocket under legislation (Hurricane Wilma bills come due.)

South Florida Sun-Sentinel Tallahassee Bureau ^ | February 14 2006 | Mark Hollis

[Caipirabob]

"Suprise, surprise, surprise"

Well, I suppose if we're going to have any insurance companies left in Florida, this is necessary. It's not like insurance companies are in business to actually give you money.

To be perfectly honest, I'm glad they're only talking about a possible 25% increase. I thought it would be higher. I'm not happy about it, but I am happy I still have most of my roof over my head... and in my neighor's yard, pool and probably the jacuzzi, but he's cleaned that out since then.

Anyway, we're starting major repairs finally this week. It's been a patch-job up until now. Hope all the rest of you are doing well with your repairs.

[Caipirabob]

Ping!

[I still care]

I am already paying far more than I can afford. $2600 on a $160K house. Not arguing with the market, which is always a losing issue, but I can tell you many elderly people I know are just not covering their homes - they just can't afford the insurance. In the news it was estimated that 25% of people in the area have no coverage.

A major hurricane in my area and you are going to have tons of elderly people with no way to fix their homes and no place to live. Many just live on their social security checks and insurance is not an option.

It won't be pretty.

[DB]

Why shouldn't people pay for the costs of where they choose to live?

[Caipirabob]

Why shouldn't people pay for the costs of where they choose to live?

It's part of the risk we take to live here. We just don't have to like it. : )

But yeah, like I said, I was glad that it's being discussed as a 25% cap on increases. I had already calculated for more, so this is nice. Let's hope that next year is a big letdown on the number of storms they are predicting.

I still care - Yeah, that's going to be very hard for those on fixed incomes. It may be that many of those elderly are living in condos, though. They won't see the major increases as much as single family home I imagine (hope.)

[Joe Boucher]

Thanks for the ping, I bought my home a year ago and paid cash.
$750,000. and i don't carry insurance.

[thomas16]

When you own a home this is something you need to be ready for. I suppose they could sell their homes and rent or move to a state where the insurance is cheaper. Also, I have a difficult time feeling sorry for some people who only live on their Social Security many of whom made decent incomes while young but didn't save a dime. It was meant to supplement your retirement income not be your only retirement income. Those are the people who will have their house blown down and then turn to the government and ask what is it going to do about this. I say sell your property and find an apartment somewhere.

[Banjoguy]

If your object is to force those on fixed incomes out of their property, this is a good way to do it.

Is anyone associated with this bill proposing any age related caps?

I realize this is a free market but the price of insurance, taxes and utility "fees" keeps going up seemingly out of control.

We are getting squeezed out. We will be looking at a move in the next two years to another state.

[thomas16]

Pretty confident nothing will happen?

[G.Mason]

Typical Floridian "me, me, me ... it's all about me" garbage.

What about New Orleens, huh?

Ever think about them po folks? Noooooo ... it's all about Florida and Mississippi.

Shame!

[thomas16]

That is true everywhere, in NJ the elderly keep whining about property taxes, they don't think they should pay theirs because they are on a fixed income, everyone else should pay their taxes because they want to live here and have a "right to". Meanwhile they take their month long cruises or trips to their summer homes in Florida. We owe them their choice of lifestyle. I'm sorry but I've seen allot of the "Greedy Old Geezer Syndrome"

[Joe Boucher]

Nope, after not getting hit by hurricanes for 50 years, I've got hit three times in two years.
Twice in two weeks the eye came over my house.
1st house needed a new pool screen, the new home is built like the proverrbial brick outhouse. Not a scratch.
ABout 8 of 10 homes in my last neighborhood lost their roofs though.
No fun.

[dawn53]

If your object is to force those on fixed incomes out of their property, this is a good way to do it

Sorry, but I'm a little cynical too. I'm not afraid of the higher insurance costs, but I'm cynical of the government's motivation.

First we added the Hurricane Deductible...and higher costs. Then each year higher costs, and the Hurricane Deductible increased. (don't know if people outside of Florida realize that even with insurance, because of the Hurricane Deductible, the homeowner is responsible for a much larger deductible if their property is damaged by a hurricane.)

My skepticism comes from the fact that if you force an elderly person out of their home, there might be other motivation for the community/lawmakers.

Take myself for instance...we bought our home almost 18 years ago, for next to nothing. Property values have skyrocketed. Our taxes remain low because of Save Our Homes and the fact that they can only raise our taxes a couple percent a year, even though the value of our home goes up much more than that a year.

If I were "forced" to sell because of insurance rates, then my property would be reassessed for tax purposes and the new owner would pay those taxes.

The "gov't" would then be able to realize a 5 fold increase in taxes because without SOH, I'd be paying 5 times what I now pay.

Tax collected woud be $500 a month.

It's the motivation of the lawmakers/tax collectors, that's in question, IMHO.

[Banjoguy]

What does your post have to do with the price of tea in China?

It matters not where the money comes from. Income is often fixed after retirement and the squeeze affects that income just the same.

We will deal with the realities as adults.

But when you work hard all your life for a decent retirement you don't want the taxing authorities, local and state, in combination with the purveyors of insurance to take it away and run you off.

That's what is happening here.

many of whom made decent incomes while young but didn't save a dime...many of whom? And just exactly how would you know that?

As for your post, it represents a patronizing, uninformed generalization, similar to 'slow drivers cause accidents', 'old people can't drive', or 'welfare recipients drive Cadillacs'.

[Non-Sequitur]

We are getting squeezed out. We will be looking at a move in the next two years to another state.

Look for one without hurricanes.

[Non-Sequitur]

First we added the Hurricane Deductible...and higher costs. Then each year higher costs, and the Hurricane Deductible increased. (don't know if people outside of Florida realize that even with insurance, because of the Hurricane Deductible, the homeowner is responsible for a much larger deductible if their property is damaged by a hurricane.)

Without allowing insurance companies to recoup their losses from paying out billions in damages from your regular hurricanes then you might be faced with a situation where your hurricane deductible is 100% of the value of your home...because no insurance company will be stupid enough to do business in Flordia. Look at the bright side. My heating bill for December was over $300 bucks for a mild month. What you save in gas bills you pay in insurance. It's a wash.

[Strategerist]

But when you work hard all your life for a decent retirement you don't want the taxing authorities, local and state, in combination with the purveyors of insurance to take it away and run you off.

It's not the purveyors of insurance, it's the hurricanes.

Unfortunately the great retiree migration to Florida corresponded to a very flukey and unusual 40+ year absence of hurricane hits in Florida, which people moving there were unable to assess or think about accurately. Now things are returning to normal for Florida hurricane hits.

In the future people are only going to be able to retire there if they can afford it. If not they'll have to move or choose another place with less risk of property destruction. Simple reality and simple economics.

However it's really not that hard or expensive to build housing that can survive the winds of all but a tiny % of hurricanes...it's unfortunate that that hasn't happened. If people simply didn't live within a couple miles of the coast, the sole damage threat would be the wind, and with proper construction the wind wouldn't be doing a lot of property damage.

[Banjoguy]

There is probably some truth to what you say. It's part of my belief system that government is not your friend.

[thomas16]

Can't they reassess whenever they want, in NJ they reassess on a regular basis, you don't have to sell your home. I think that the cost of living is catching up with these areas that have a high risk of home damage. In NJ we pay very high car insurance rates because the chances of an accident or having your car stolen are higher. In Florida you don't pay high car insurance rates because that is not the case. You should pay higher homeowner rates because the chance of your house blowing away is greater. I think the conspiracy theory that your local government is chomping at the bit to move you out of your house to get $500 more a year are a little far fetched. If the local government needs more money they will find a way to raise your taxes. From what I hear Florida is a very inexpensive state to live in, that's why allot of New Yorkers retire there, or at least have summer homes there. I think if you have a home in a high risk area you should pay for it not the people who choose not to live there.

[dawn53]

I'm really not complaining about the costs of insurance. For us, the costs are very affordable. I'm just discussing motivation. There have to be ways they can protect those (especially the elderly who have owned their homes for years) that would be forced out of their homes by the insurance rates...I just don't know if they want to.

P.S. Want to compare Air Conditioning rates, LOL!