[CSwofford147@comcast.net]

In a hand out from the State of Florida it states( How do I know whether my policy excludes sinkhole coverage. Policies that exclude sinkhole coverage will have the following wording on the Declarations page: Your policy provides coverage for a catastrophic ground cover collapse that results in the property being condemned and uninhabitable. Otherwise, your policy does not provide coverage for sinkhole losses.
You may purchase additional coverage for sinkhole losses for an additional premium.) The statement that you can purchase additional coverage for sinkhole losses is a fraudulent statement. In order to purchase sinkhole coverage you must have the property inspected and to my knowledge there are very few properties that pass. The criteria is based on all most solely in the Villages on the score on the Sinkhole Index. It goes from 0 to 800 with 800 being the most impacted by ground subsidence activity. I your home is to my knowledge within a couple of miles of sinkhole activity you will receive a rating of 700 and will get a letter that you home is uninsurable. I have never gotten a definitive answer as to how close your home has to be to sinkhole activity to be denied insurance but is my understanding that there are very few homes in the Villages that pass. This denial of insurance is based on the location of the property and it is known to the inspection company and the insurance agent before they go out on these inspections that the property is uninsurable. If you have sinkhole damage and have the wording in your policy stated above and your home is damaged but not condemned by the county authorities you will be responsible for the cost of all damages. This can easily run between $100,000 and $200,00 dollars. This information is known to the Villages when they sell you homes but they withhold this material fact because they think it will be bad for business.

[BobnBev]

I have sinkhole insurance, and haven't gone thru any of that.

[justjim]

Insurance legislation regarding sinkholes may be needed in Florida to protect homeowners. Why could you get sinkhole insurance on a new home and not a resale? It seems to me the "risk" to an insurance company would be the same.

Something doesn't add up.

[janmcn]

Originally Posted by justjim

Insurance legislation regarding sinkholes may be needed in Florida to protect homeowners. Why could you get sinkhole insurance on a new home and not a resale? It seems to me the "risk" to an insurance company would be the same.

Something doesn't add up.

It's the Florida Legislature that got us in this mess in the first place when they passed the law in 2012 allowing for this new term "catastrophic ground collapse" as opposed to the all encompassing term sinkhole. Since this law was passed, sinkhole claims have dropped by 80%, I just read in The Tampa Bay Times editorial yesterday. Guess who was behind this law?

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by janmcn

It's the Florida Legislature that got us in this mess in the first place when they passed the law in 2012 allowing for this new term "catastrophic ground collapse" as opposed to the all encompassing term sinkhole. Since this law was passed, sinkhole claims have dropped by 80%, I just read in The Tampa Bay Times editorial yesterday. Guess who was behind this law?

The law is far from perfect....that I will agree with.

However, as always, we forget all of the fraud and abuse of the insurers by contractors and adjusters in the past. Folks were actually putting large additions on their homes with sinkhole payoffs from insurance companies.

It is not the best law, for sure, we continually get upset with people in lawmaking simply trying to stay ahead of the fraud, and the lawyers who are just waiting to "put it to the man" !!!


If there are other ways to stop the fraud and robbery of insurers, let us hear it. One way is be stricter with builders, but you can just imagine what that would do to home prices.

OP blames the Villages....the last post blames the state. It is the fault of those folks who think they deserve somebody elses money and the lawyers who help find the way !

I guess my major point is that the law is geared to insure the damage is actually from sinkholes and that the money paid is used to fix the sinkhole, not to put in an addition to the home.

Why we never blame the tax frauds, the welfare frauds, etc.....just beyond me. They have all our legislators running to catch up with the latest scam, and we still blame the insurers because they were scammed. They sure are not saints but why do we never call it what is is. Situations caused by people trying to beat the system.

[Steve9930]

Originally Posted by Bucco

The law is far from perfect....that I will agree with.

However, as always, we forget all of the fraud and abuse of the insurers by contractors and adjusters in the past. Folks were actually putting large additions on their homes with sinkhole payoffs from insurance companies.

It is not the best law, for sure, we continually get upset with people in lawmaking simply trying to stay ahead of the fraud, and the lawyers who are just waiting to "put it to the man" !!!


If there are other ways to stop the fraud and robbery of insurers, let us hear it. One way is be stricter with builders, but you can just imagine what that would do to home prices.

OP blames the Villages....the last post blames the state. It is the fault of those folks who think they deserve somebody elses money and the lawyers who help find the way !

Your post is write on target. After my Insurance Company Dropped the Sink Hole and changed it to Catastrophic Ground Collapse I was furious. But after researching the problem I understand their point of view. The amount of fraud was unbelievable. So if you want to be angry about what is now law be angry at the right people. Catastrophic Ground Collapse will still fix the problem. Also homes that are fixed correctly are probably the safest in the area.

[ilovetv]

Originally Posted by CSwofford147@comcast.net

In a hand out from the State of Florida it states( How do I know whether my policy excludes sinkhole coverage. Policies that exclude sinkhole coverage will have the following wording on the Declarations page: Your policy provides coverage for a catastrophic ground cover collapse that results in the property being condemned and uninhabitable. Otherwise, your policy does not provide coverage for sinkhole losses.
You may purchase additional coverage for sinkhole losses for an additional premium.) The statement that you can purchase additional coverage for sinkhole losses is a fraudulent statement. In order to purchase sinkhole coverage you must have the property inspected and to my knowledge there are very few properties that pass. The criteria is based on all most solely in the Villages on the score on the Sinkhole Index. It goes from 0 to 800 with 800 being the most impacted by ground subsidence activity. I your home is to my knowledge within a couple of miles of sinkhole activity you will receive a rating of 700 and will get a letter that you home is uninsurable. I have never gotten a definitive answer as to how close your home has to be to sinkhole activity to be denied insurance but is my understanding that there are very few homes in the Villages that pass. This denial of insurance is based on the location of the property and it is known to the inspection company and the insurance agent before they go out on these inspections that the property is uninsurable. If you have sinkhole damage and have the wording in your policy stated above and your home is damaged but not condemned by the county authorities you will be responsible for the cost of all damages. This can easily run between $100,000 and $200,00 dollars. This information is known to the Villages when they sell you homes but they withhold this material fact because they think it will be bad for business.

Several things wrong with this. First, unless the TV sales reps are licensed insurance agents, they cannot legally tell you what kind of insurance coverages you could get on a particular property, nor can they tell you what would be denied or written by a particular insurance company. This would be misrepresentation.

Secondly, when we bought our resale home and were getting ready for closing several years ago, we called on The Villages Insurance (independent agency owned by TV) at LSL, to get the homeowner insurance quote.

They quoted us American Integrity Ins. Co. of FL, and one of the first things they pointed out in all the supplemental coverages THEY automatically built into the quote was "Sinkhole" coverage. I did not ask for it and in fact, I had to ask what it was for when they listed all the supplemental coverages they automatically quoted.

Attached here are photos of our same policy we've had since purchase, and these photos are of pertinent sections of the renewal policy we paid for last month.

Page 1 lays it out clearly "The definition for "Catastrophic Ground Cover Collapse" has been further defined, and changed to restrict coverage to the "Principal Building."...... See below.

In my opinion it is telling that the o.p.'s TOTV member stats page includes Class Acton lawsuit correspondence from the head of the POA, mentioning Class Action lawsuit potential now for sinkholes.

See actual policy coverages and language in policy renewed last month:

First photo shows "Sinkhole" coverage = "Yes" and the added premium for that is $249 (well worth it!!!)





This is PAGE 1 of the renewed insurance policy, and it couldn't get any more clear than this:

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by janmcn

It's the Florida Legislature that got us in this mess in the first place when they passed the law in 2012 allowing for this new term "catastrophic ground collapse" as opposed to the all encompassing term sinkhole. Since this law was passed, sinkhole claims have dropped by 80%, I just read in The Tampa Bay Times editorial yesterday. Guess who was behind this law?

Just as Bucco says. Read here from The Tampa Bay Times the abuse of the prior laws from people using the insurance money from the State for friviolous things.
Sinkholes become Florida's latest insurance disaster | Tampa Bay Times

[Golfingnut]

Wow. Never too old to pick up on a tip of how to protect oneself. Thanks Bucco

[janmcn]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Just as Bucco says. Read here from The Tampa Bay Times the abuse of the prior laws from people using the insurance money from the State for friviolous things.
Sinkholes become Florida's latest insurance disaster | Tampa Bay Times

The insurance companies have a fiduciary responsibility to protect themselves and their shareholders from waste, fraud and abuse. Since they are unable or unwilling to carry out that responsibility, they are now allowed, by the FL legislature, to punish people who never commited any fraud by not providing them with sinkhole insurance (other than the catastrophic ground coverage).

What other states have natural disasters; ie tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, fires, mudslides, etc, that are not insured?

If posters on here think it's no big deal to write out a check for $200,000 to $300,000 to cover a sinkhole in their yard, so be it. That's what the homeowners in Buttonwood would have had to do if they hadn't had sinkhole insurance.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by janmcn

The insurance companies have a fiduciary responsibility to protect themselves and their shareholders from waste, fraud and abuse. Since they are unable or unwilling to carry out that responsibility, they are now allowed, by the FL legislature, to punish people who never commited any fraud by not providing them with sinkhole insurance (other than the catastrophic ground coverage).

What other states have natural disasters; ie tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, fires, mudslides, etc, that are not insured?

If posters on here think it's no big deal to write out a check for $200,000 to $300,000 to cover a sinkhole in their yard, so be it. That's what the homeowners in Buttonwood would have had to do if they hadn't had sinkhole insurance.

WOW...you went right by the underlying situation here, and took the road many travel because it is easier...not right or correct, but just easy, and just as an aside...most of the critique comes from a political movement, not logic or goodness.

I am not in anyway a defender of any insurance company and recognize their lobby power.

However, this entire thing is a result of insurance companies being bilked over years in this arena.

You are not alone in saying this bill is not the best, but the astronomical amounts of money being "stolen" from them demanded some action.

No different than classes being held openly on how to defraud tax or welfare, and when the call comes to tighten everything up, we blame NOT those who caused the tightening, but those who want reform.

When folks were actually prosecuted for these scams, certain groups were outraged at insurance companies even questioning them.....hard to imagine but true.

There are two sides to all stories, and it's time we hear both before deciding that it is those "dirty, rich money grabbers". All of those May fit at times, but we need to stop with knee jerk political responses, listen and read before we espouse our opinions.

I offer no answer to this, but I DO understand what CAUSED it to happen, and hope someday we think in terms of who was actually the root cause, and HELP in weeding them out and punishing them

Those who practice this knee jerk reaction to situations like this need to understand it is ALWAYS the good hardworking folks who suffer, while those who cause the reforms are defended and protected.

I am a bit sensitive to this genre, having witnessed first hand those who "school" in stealing from our welfare programs, and then receiving passionate defense for their actions in certain quarters.

As an after thought, Citizens Property Insurance in 2009 paid EIGHTY FOUR MILLION dollars in losses. In 2010, they received THIRTY TWO MILLION dollars in premiums and the costs associated with those premiums was TWO HUNDRED FORTY FIVE MILLION dollars. Staggering losses and the law would not allow an increase in premiums more than 10% a year, but finally in 2011, sinkhole coverage was exempted from that cap.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by janmcn

The insurance companies have a fiduciary responsibility to protect themselves and their shareholders from waste, fraud and abuse. Since they are unable or unwilling to carry out that responsibility, they are now allowed, by the FL legislature, to punish people who never commited any fraud by not providing them with sinkhole insurance (other than the catastrophic ground coverage).

What other states have natural disasters; ie tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, fires, mudslides, etc, that are not insured?

If posters on here think it's no big deal to write out a check for $200,000 to $300,000 to cover a sinkhole in their yard, so be it. That's what the homeowners in Buttonwood would have had to do if they hadn't had sinkhole insurance.

You can't get blood out of a turnip. You cannot have people use up the State's fund for this serious and much needed insurance for frivolous purposes and not change the laws. EVERYONE suffers when this happens. We can't keep spending spending spending and not have virtuous people cheated. I think that the legislature did the only thing it could do. We are all still covered for the very kind of terrible thing that happened in Buttonwood. But we can't get money for minor cracks and not house threatening events. Bucco explained it far better than I could. And so did the link I posted from the Tampa Bay Times. I think you were trying to politicize this issue.

[ilovetv]

Originally Posted by janmcn

The insurance companies have a fiduciary responsibility to protect themselves and their shareholders from waste, fraud and abuse. Since they are unable or unwilling to carry out that responsibility, they are now allowed, by the FL legislature, to punish people who never commited any fraud by not providing them with sinkhole insurance (other than the catastrophic ground coverage).

What other states have natural disasters; ie tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, fires, mudslides, etc, that are not insured?

If posters on here think it's no big deal to write out a check for $200,000 to $300,000 to cover a sinkhole in their yard, so be it. That's what the homeowners in Buttonwood would have had to do if they hadn't had sinkhole insurance.

Not every area or community of the country participates in the federal flood insurance program:

DHS FEMA NFIP Services - eWaterwark

To be compliant with the NFIP, a community must adopt and enforce minimum floodplain management requirements within the SFHAs of the community. These requirements are designed to prevent new and substantially damaged or substantially improved existing development from increasing the flood damage potential and to protect development from future flooding.

FEMA urges all eligible communities to take the necessary steps to join the NFIP so that:

Property owners and renters may be approved for Federal disaster assistance;

Property owners and renters may obtain federally backed flood insurance; and

Future development in SFHAs is regulated to reduce the impacts of the devastating effects of flood disasters.

[Moderator]

Please stick to the topic of sinkhole insurance policies and avoid getting into political discussions. Please address the topic and not each other.

Moderator

[janmcn]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

You can't get blood out of a turnip. You cannot have people use up the State's fund for this serious and much needed insurance for frivolous purposes and not change the laws. EVERYONE suffers when this happens. We can't keep spending spending spending and not have virtuous people cheated. I think that the legislature did the only thing it could do. We are all still covered for the very kind of terrible thing that happened in Buttonwood. But we can't get money for minor cracks and not house threatening events. Bucco explained it far better than I could. And so did the link I posted from the Tampa Bay Times. I think you were trying to politicize this issue.

Insurance companies are not using State's funds, unless you have your insurance with Citizens, which very few Villages' residents have.

People who do not have sinkhole coverage are not covered for the kind of terrible thing that happened in Buttonwood. The homes there have not been declared uninhabitable by a government official. Therefore, they would not qualify under the catastrophic ground coverage.