When there is talk of going naked my thoughts always go to mortgage holders and originators. Isn't comprehensive coverage typically a requirement? What happens to existing mortgages when coverage lapses, even in part?
Great piece. The thought I had reading it was: “How much will this depress the value of homes in Nevada?” Especially those near the WUI with the highest fire risk?
S - would it be possible for a post with your predictions for a future world sans CAT insurance ? Here in Spain whilst DANA ALICE was not lethal like last year in Valencia the actual scope of damage was colossal . The floods this week in Seville were also shocking . Near me two sleepy not rich , not touristy micro towns Alcanar and Gödel were battered in ALICE . What hope do these communities have when Mazon the leader of Valencia AC has refused to resign in disgrace ! This is a toxic brew for everyday people .
I am so happy to read an article that suggests both increasing research into building / fire science, and improving building codes so that buildings built in fire-prone areas will be unlikely to burn down. I really see no alternative. Like flood insurance, wildfire insurance for high risk areas is likely to become more and more expensive, and I have to think that eventually it will strangle the real estate market in places like California and Nevada unless someone finds a way to identify and build homes that can be insured at a reasonable rate.
Or, as the article suggested politicians might do, we could fob it all off onto the federal government, or we could raise everyone's premiums across the nation to pay for people who continue to build matchstick homes in wildfire prone areas. Because hey, why fix it when you can just kick the can further down the road?
I’ve been calling for an all natural hazards peril on all homeowners policies in the US for 25 years. Creating a risk pool that large, with accompanying rates to vary depending on known risk (floodplain and WUI locations, for example) may offer affordable alternatives to denying coverage.
It’s unfathomable to me that insurers would exclude the very named peril that was the foundation of property insurance-fire! And it’s easy enough to mitigate and reduce risk in the WUI as it is in the floodplain.
Because of accelerating Climate Change it is NOT "easy enough to mitigate and reduce risk in the WUI". That's the part that's missing from this discussion.
If you live in the woods now, you will get burned out over the next 20 years. That's the "new reality".
When there is talk of going naked my thoughts always go to mortgage holders and originators. Isn't comprehensive coverage typically a requirement? What happens to existing mortgages when coverage lapses, even in part?
I had exactly the same question.
Great piece. The thought I had reading it was: “How much will this depress the value of homes in Nevada?” Especially those near the WUI with the highest fire risk?
S - would it be possible for a post with your predictions for a future world sans CAT insurance ? Here in Spain whilst DANA ALICE was not lethal like last year in Valencia the actual scope of damage was colossal . The floods this week in Seville were also shocking . Near me two sleepy not rich , not touristy micro towns Alcanar and Gödel were battered in ALICE . What hope do these communities have when Mazon the leader of Valencia AC has refused to resign in disgrace ! This is a toxic brew for everyday people .
I am so happy to read an article that suggests both increasing research into building / fire science, and improving building codes so that buildings built in fire-prone areas will be unlikely to burn down. I really see no alternative. Like flood insurance, wildfire insurance for high risk areas is likely to become more and more expensive, and I have to think that eventually it will strangle the real estate market in places like California and Nevada unless someone finds a way to identify and build homes that can be insured at a reasonable rate.
Or, as the article suggested politicians might do, we could fob it all off onto the federal government, or we could raise everyone's premiums across the nation to pay for people who continue to build matchstick homes in wildfire prone areas. Because hey, why fix it when you can just kick the can further down the road?
I’ve been calling for an all natural hazards peril on all homeowners policies in the US for 25 years. Creating a risk pool that large, with accompanying rates to vary depending on known risk (floodplain and WUI locations, for example) may offer affordable alternatives to denying coverage.
thanks so much for reading the post. Our fractured system is truly showing its weaknesses - and is unconnected to any planning efforts -
It’s unfathomable to me that insurers would exclude the very named peril that was the foundation of property insurance-fire! And it’s easy enough to mitigate and reduce risk in the WUI as it is in the floodplain.
Because of accelerating Climate Change it is NOT "easy enough to mitigate and reduce risk in the WUI". That's the part that's missing from this discussion.
If you live in the woods now, you will get burned out over the next 20 years. That's the "new reality".