4 ms·

I'm sorry for your loss. Are you lucky enough to be in a place where insurers in California are still operating? Hopefully you can at least get financial situat

by culi 2y ago

I'm sorry for your loss. Are you lucky enough to be in a place where insurers in California are still operating? Hopefully you can at least get financial situation taken off your mind

geysersam 2y ago
Are there areas of California where insurers are not operating anymore because of wildfires? That's crazy
- jandrewrogers 2y ago
  Yes, there are parts of California that are uninsurable against wildfires. Technically they could be insurable but State regulators will not allow insurance companies to raise premiums sufficient to cover the actuarial risk. The necessary premiums are prohibitively expensive for homeowners, but anything less risks bankrupting the insurance companies and increases their reinsurance costs which also must be passed on to homeowners. This is mostly on the California government, since the high insurance premiums are a side effect of disastrous wildfire mitigation policy in California. More proactive and competent wildfire mitigation would reduce the risk and therefore make insurance premiums more reasonable.
  - ashoeafoot 2y ago
    Would it make sense to allow this? The models as you said make it a non viable buisness and where that gap exists scams move in, which the routinely have to be bailed out by the public.
  - mschuster91 2y ago
    > More proactive and competent wildfire mitigation would reduce the risk and therefore make insurance premiums more reasonable. Or... not building mansions next to forestry? In Germany we have pretty strict requirements on distances, so it's rare for damages to occur. Also, most of our power grid infrastructure is buried below ground, so videos like the ones circulating on Twitter from arcing lines setting bushes and trees alight can't really happen here either. Prevention is orders of magnitude cheaper in the long run.
    - NewJazz 2y ago
      Fwiw these aren't really forest fires, they are brush fires.
    - friend_Fernando 2y ago
      The largest power company in CA is in the process of burying its cables. The risk level is not just affected by proximity to forests. For offshore (Santa Ana) wind events, the riskiest areas are the SW bottom of hills and near canyons. That's where the current LA fires are. IMO, a better prevention measure would be to not build houses out of sticks. That's already the case for much of the housing in Europe. Alas, here in the US the colonial and cabin aesthetics still win out, even when fire-resistant options aren't more expensive. Coffey Park in Santa Rosa was destroyed in 2017, and most properties were rebuilt to lower fire-resistance standards.[1] The second little pig just doesn't wanna hear it. https://wildfiretoday.com/2019/11/19/after-the-tubbs-fire-homes-in-california-town-are-being-rebuilt-without-strong-building-codes/ https://wildfiretoday.com/2019/11/19/after-the-tubbs-fire-ho...
      - mschuster91 2y ago
        > IMO, a better prevention measure would be to not build houses out of sticks. That's already the case for much of the housing in Europe. The only thing that helps against is hurricanes and other storm events. Once the fire has blown up the windows and embers (or outright flames) enter the interior, it's game over generally. You might be able to re-use a concrete or brick structure after a large fire, but if the fire ran unchecked until it burned out everything, no chance - concrete will have lost rebar integrity and bricks will have soaked up toxic combustion products.
        friend_Fernando 2y ago
        Here in CA, it's more about reducing the spreading speed than about the resistance level once the fire gets there. All the large structure fires in recent years spread at breakneck speeds during an offshore wind event. In these cases, all that firefighters can do early on is evacuate people.
  - culi 2y ago
    As someone pointed out above, California has the FAIR plan for over 50 years which has been pretty effective. This LA fire might be its biggest test. Basically there's no part of California that is not insurable against wildfire https://grist.org/extreme-weather/california-overhauled-its-insurance-system-then-los-angeles-caught-fire/ https://grist.org/extreme-weather/california-overhauled-its-...
throwup238 2y ago
> Are you lucky enough to be in a place where insurers in California are still operating? California has had a state fire insurer (FAIR) of last resort for over fifty years and fire insurance is practically mandatory for mortgages so there aren’t many places that are excluded. It’s entirely funded by premiums and has never been bailed out by state or federal funds. It’s not like the National Insurance Flood Program that’s burned billions of dollars in federal funding to subsidize people living in flood plains and Florida.
- aaronbrethorst 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - infecto 2y ago
    > FTFY: subsidize people living in red states Please leave politics out of this discussion, it's immature.
    - Yeul 2y ago
      Lol tell that to Trump.
      - aaronbrethorst 2y ago
        yep precisely: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-and-his-allies-follow-well-worn-playbook-to-gloat-over-devastating-la-wildfires https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-and-his-allies-foll...
        infecto 2y ago
        And those comments are as distasteful as yours.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
bloudermilk 2y ago
Luckily we insured through the California State Fair plan. FEMA may also be able to provide some assistance. We’re learning as much as we can as fast as we can, but it can be difficult to source accurate information. Thank you for your kindness.

by culi 2y ago

I'm sorry for your loss. Are you lucky enough to be in a place where insurers in California are still operating? Hopefully you can at least get financial situation taken off your mind

geysersam 2y ago

Are there areas of California where insurers are not operating anymore because of wildfires? That's crazy

jandrewrogers 2y ago
Yes, there are parts of California that are uninsurable against wildfires. Technically they could be insurable but State regulators will not allow insurance companies to raise premiums sufficient to cover the actuarial risk. The necessary premiums are prohibitively expensive for homeowners, but anything less risks bankrupting the insurance companies and increases their reinsurance costs which also must be passed on to homeowners. This is mostly on the California government, since the high insurance premiums are a side effect of disastrous wildfire mitigation policy in California. More proactive and competent wildfire mitigation would reduce the risk and therefore make insurance premiums more reasonable.
- ashoeafoot 2y ago
  Would it make sense to allow this? The models as you said make it a non viable buisness and where that gap exists scams move in, which the routinely have to be bailed out by the public.
- mschuster91 2y ago
  > More proactive and competent wildfire mitigation would reduce the risk and therefore make insurance premiums more reasonable. Or... not building mansions next to forestry? In Germany we have pretty strict requirements on distances, so it's rare for damages to occur. Also, most of our power grid infrastructure is buried below ground, so videos like the ones circulating on Twitter from arcing lines setting bushes and trees alight can't really happen here either. Prevention is orders of magnitude cheaper in the long run.
  - NewJazz 2y ago
    Fwiw these aren't really forest fires, they are brush fires.
  - friend_Fernando 2y ago
    The largest power company in CA is in the process of burying its cables. The risk level is not just affected by proximity to forests. For offshore (Santa Ana) wind events, the riskiest areas are the SW bottom of hills and near canyons. That's where the current LA fires are. IMO, a better prevention measure would be to not build houses out of sticks. That's already the case for much of the housing in Europe. Alas, here in the US the colonial and cabin aesthetics still win out, even when fire-resistant options aren't more expensive. Coffey Park in Santa Rosa was destroyed in 2017, and most properties were rebuilt to lower fire-resistance standards.[1] The second little pig just doesn't wanna hear it. https://wildfiretoday.com/2019/11/19/after-the-tubbs-fire-homes-in-california-town-are-being-rebuilt-without-strong-building-codes/ https://wildfiretoday.com/2019/11/19/after-the-tubbs-fire-ho...
    - mschuster91 2y ago
      > IMO, a better prevention measure would be to not build houses out of sticks. That's already the case for much of the housing in Europe. The only thing that helps against is hurricanes and other storm events. Once the fire has blown up the windows and embers (or outright flames) enter the interior, it's game over generally. You might be able to re-use a concrete or brick structure after a large fire, but if the fire ran unchecked until it burned out everything, no chance - concrete will have lost rebar integrity and bricks will have soaked up toxic combustion products.
      - friend_Fernando 2y ago
        Here in CA, it's more about reducing the spreading speed than about the resistance level once the fire gets there. All the large structure fires in recent years spread at breakneck speeds during an offshore wind event. In these cases, all that firefighters can do early on is evacuate people.
- culi 2y ago
  As someone pointed out above, California has the FAIR plan for over 50 years which has been pretty effective. This LA fire might be its biggest test. Basically there's no part of California that is not insurable against wildfire https://grist.org/extreme-weather/california-overhauled-its-insurance-system-then-los-angeles-caught-fire/ https://grist.org/extreme-weather/california-overhauled-its-...

throwup238 2y ago

> Are you lucky enough to be in a place where insurers in California are still operating? California has had a state fire insurer (FAIR) of last resort for over fifty years and fire insurance is practically mandatory for mortgages so there aren’t many places that are excluded. It’s entirely funded by premiums and has never been bailed out by state or federal funds. It’s not like the National Insurance Flood Program that’s burned billions of dollars in federal funding to subsidize people living in flood plains and Florida.

aaronbrethorst 2y ago
[flagged]
- infecto 2y ago
  > FTFY: subsidize people living in red states Please leave politics out of this discussion, it's immature.
  - Yeul 2y ago
    Lol tell that to Trump.
    - aaronbrethorst 2y ago
      yep precisely: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-and-his-allies-follow-well-worn-playbook-to-gloat-over-devastating-la-wildfires https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-and-his-allies-foll...
      - infecto 2y ago
        And those comments are as distasteful as yours.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]

bloudermilk 2y ago

Luckily we insured through the California State Fair plan. FEMA may also be able to provide some assistance. We’re learning as much as we can as fast as we can, but it can be difficult to source accurate information. Thank you for your kindness.