[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I would just like to clarify paragraph 2. It should be.....if you multiply by the average number of people in each household, which would be 2.5 times 4700, which equals 11,750.

The problem is that the $100 billion in damages was not just to private homes. Much, if not most, of the damage was to other structures, like commercial and Government buildings and roads and bridges. I think it also includes debris removal and cleanup costs.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by 44Apple

Insurance is increasing nationwide, a good deal of it is at least partially due to the plethora of natural disasters. Not just a Florida problem.

A good time to ask WHAT is CAUSING that, "plethora of natural disasters"? The scientific community says that it is global warming caused by CO2 emissions (cars, trucks, and golf carts) that end up in the upper atmosphere and in the ocean (killing the coral reefs). The world's population in 1960 was 3 billion, today it is 9 billion....which means more polluting vehicles operating around the world.
......The UN stated that so far 2023 has the record for world temperatures. And each year from now on is predicted to have increased temperatures. This will CAUSE INSURANCE to keep rising, due to increased hurricanes, fires, and other natural disasters.
.......Interestingly, there is a recent factory in the US that scrubs CO2 from the atmosphere and neutralizes it (in caves). But, there needs to be about 50 to 100 more such factories built by other countries around the world to begin to remove enough CO2 to reverse the global warming.
.........And therefore reduce insurance costs.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Things can only be changed within the ability to control them. Nobody can change natural disasters. What can be changed?

- People living inland, who have significantly lower exposure to natural disaster risk, should not have their premiums jacked up to subsidize those who choose to live closer to harms way. If people living close to the shore can’t afford, or get, insurance then that shouldn’t be others problems for their riskier choices.
- Do something about the roofing scam, like pro-rating replacement based on age.
- Regulations on insurance companies needs to strike a delicate balance between protecting both the customers and the insurers. If the regulations are too onerous for insurers, they will simply pull out of the market. Insurance Companies are all about diversifying risk, unfortunately hurricane risk is next to impossible to diversify. It’s critical to have as many Companies as possible willing to write policies in the market to keep any individual company’s exposure to the region down, resulting in lower premiums. The opposite is happening in Florida, as evidenced by Farmers pulling entirely out of the state. That leads to thousands of homeowners looking for policies from a limited number of remaining insurers who have little or no appetite for more correlated risk that can’t be diversified away. Under that scenario, premiums can only go in one direction.

To answer the ? posted in the 1st paragraph. What can be done? CO2 pollution MUST be reduced. Since one can NOT control the population increases from 1960 to today, then, the answer is more new E-vehicles need to be purchased by US citizens. In the US 8% of new vehicles are ELECTRIC, in Europe it is 20%.
........Also, more factories to capture CO2.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

A good time to ask WHAT is CAUSING that, "plethora of natural disasters"? The scientific community says that it is global warming caused by CO2 emissions (cars, trucks, and golf carts) that end up in the upper atmosphere and in the ocean (killing the coral reefs). The world's population in 1960 was 3 billion, today it is 9 billion....which means more polluting vehicles operating around the world.
......The UN stated that so far 2023 has the record for world temperatures. And each year from now on is predicted to have increased temperatures. This will CAUSE INSURANCE to keep rising, due to increased hurricanes, fires, and other natural disasters.
.......Interestingly, there is a recent factory in the US that scrubs CO2 from the atmosphere and neutralizes it (in caves). But, there needs to be about 50 to 100 more such factories built by other countries around the world to begin to remove enough CO2 to reverse the global warming.
.........And therefore reduce insurance costs.

Well this might solve the problem in 20 years or so but think the better question is what can be done now to keep insurance costs more management in the next few years.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

I just pulled my insurance policy and looked at it. 75% of the premium is for hurricane exposure!! And my hurricane deductible is $6500.

Well, that is NOT a big surprise to me. Because scientists say that world HEAT is increasing (Antarctica ice is melting) .........water surrounding Florida will keep making new records for HEAT and that FUELS hurricanes.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by C. C. Rider

First, you are overlooking the fact that MOST people have insurance on their home that would cover hurricane damage. Typically, this doesn't cover FLOOD or STORM SURGE damage, but it does cover damage that is a direct result of the wind and any subsequent damage that may be done if the wind causes a roof leak or window breakage or other wind related damage.

Second, you are overlooking the fact that property insurers have RE-insurers which provide insurance to them in case of catastrophic losses. In other words, the insurance companies have insurance too to protect them against unusually large losses.

Third, not all hurricane damage losses are covered by insurance. Much of it is due to flood losses which (usually) aren't covered unless the person or business bought flood insurance which is very expensive. It's expensive because not everyone shares equally in the threat of flood damage.

People who live on high ground have no need for expensive flood insurance, so they don't buy it. People who live in flood-prone areas NEED flood insurance, but since the cost is usually quite high, many people don't buy it even though they may need it.

And finally, we can be thankful that an "Ian" level storm doesn't hit us every year. So, even if the insurance companies may lose money in one year, they can make it up in other years in which their losses are less. It's kind of like the gambling in Las Vegas. Occasionally the house may get hit for a big loss, but they make it up by winning many small bets... and most of the big ones too.

I would agree with the last paragraph if the HEAT level around the world (and population) had stayed the same as it was in 2010. Unfortunately, those factors have changed and the trend is predicted to increase.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

People are complaining about insurance costs going up. However, insurance is merely spreading the risk of losses over a large number of people. The chance of a single home burning down in a year is quite slim so insurance companies can sell home insurance to everyone in a city and use the premiums from those whose homes are not burned down to compensate the few policy holders whose homes are burned down. That is how it works in theory.

However, I am not sure if that works in the case of catastrophic losses such as hurricanes that hit thousands of homes and businesses. Hurricane Ian caused about $100 billion in damages in Florida. The population in Florida is about 21 million people and the average household is about 2.5 people. If you divide $100 billion by 21 million, that is about $4700 a person. If you multiply that by the number of households, each household would have to pay $11,750 just to pay for Ian.

Ian is a bit of an exception since Florida doesn't get an Ian every year. However, Florida gets hit with a hurricane about once every two years and seems to get hit with a major hurricane at least once a decade. Irma cost about $30 billion in 2017.

I am not an underwriter or an actuary but I don't see how people in Florida can pay enough insurance to cover their losses. Hopefully, there are some insurance people on this board that may have solutions.

IMO Get rid of insurance lobbyist. Any lobbying should be 15 year prison term for both. Pass law if want sell insurance it’s all 50 state or none. Why should they get to pick me choose? Funny how they claim loosing money when upper management and CEOs rake in millions. Bottom line everyone expect the government to just bail them out. Too big to fail mentality

[rockyhyder]

FEMA estimated damage is calculated in the early stages of disaster recovery and is almost always over estimated, plus as pointed out by other posters represents losses by government agencies for roads, bridges and cleanup none of which are insured losses so the insured risk are much lower than the overall damage total.
IMHO the problem in Florida lies with two aspects of insurance risk.
1. Insurance regulations that heavily favor litigation against insurers resulting in higher losses than normal (e.g. free roof scam).
2. The Florida Legislature needs to amend insurance regulations separating the high risk coastal zones from the normal risk inland areas allowing insurance companies to choose the level of risk and apply the appropriate premium instead of insuring all or none.
I suspect number two will be a difficult sell because of the personal interest of Legislators and their friends.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Fltpkr

Just a thought -- Would it be helpful long term to have more stringent coastal restrictions that prevent or restrict rebuilding or new building in the high risk areas and/or require that more "hurricane and flood resistant" structures be adopted and existing structures modified?

Can existing ground-level home or business owners be required to modify their structures to a more hurricane-resistant design? For example, could all homeowners or business owners of ground level structures of one or two stories in high risk areas be required to modify their structures within 10 years so that they are elevated (on stilts) above a certain minimum height and resistant to specified high-level wind forces?

Are there infrastructure changes that would help reduce the damage from hurricane/tidal surge - such as the addition of break-waters, barrier islands, dunes, marshland, etc?

Oregon has a state policy to NOT allow residential or any building 1/2 mile from the ocean's edge. This rule gives protection for lives, and homes, and provides miles of walkable and bikeable beach.
........Please check that out and could it be done in Florida?

[Rainger99]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Oregon has a state policy to NOT allow residential or any building 1/2 mile from the ocean's edge. This rule gives protection for lives, and homes, and provides miles of walkable and bikeable beach.
........Please check that out and could it be done in Florida?

If you go on google maps, there is a lot of Florida property within a half mile of the beach!!! Millions of people would have to move.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Oregon has a state policy to NOT allow residential or any building 1/2 mile from the ocean's edge. This rule gives protection for lives, and homes, and provides miles of walkable and bikeable beach.
........Please check that out and could it be done in Florida?

Guess you have no answer as to how to fix this problem now as opposed to when we are all gone.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Well, that is NOT a big surprise to me. Because scientists say that world HEAT is increasing (Antarctica ice is melting) .........water surrounding Florida will keep making new records for HEAT and that FUELS hurricanes.

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I would agree with the last paragraph if the HEAT level around the world (and population) had stayed the same as it was in 2010. Unfortunately, those factors have changed and the trend is predicted to increase.

Just like clockwork...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Oregon has a state policy to NOT allow residential or any building 1/2 mile from the ocean's edge. This rule gives protection for lives, and homes, and provides miles of walkable and bikeable beach.
........Please check that out and could it be done in Florida?

Incorrect... There is no such law...

Oregon’s land-use rules bump up against increasingly crowded shorelines - OPB

[bcsnave]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Incorrect... There is no such law...

Oregon’s land-use rules bump up against increasingly crowded shorelines - OPB

I love that you fact check. It is important that people verify verses just taking someones '"statement". Even then a person had to check for themself.

I applaude you sir.

[Marsha11]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

I just pulled my insurance policy and looked at it. 75% of the premium is for hurricane exposure!! And my hurricane deductible is $6500.

And, there has never hurricanes in The Villages. It gets a little windy with rain but in 13 years for us it's been OK. But the ins, has tripled. They will now only allow 10 years and then you won't have any. They depreciate at 10%per year.
Sounds great right? A metal roof is guaranteed by the mfg. For 50 years. The ins. Only allows 12 years.