It’s a way of making reasonable profits providing a service people need.
And 6 months ago they saw that they were likely to take major losses insuring homes in that area so they stopped renewing policies. So the options were to use the last-resort state provided insurance (FAIR Act), go uninsured, or move. A lot of people didn’t switch to the state insurance.
They’ve been collecting insurance payments on those houses WITHOUT LOSSES for many months. What happened to the money they paid over the years? Just consumed and forgotten by insurance companies? You pay $2000 a month for 360 months and then they decide to drop you and you have no coverage? That $700k+ you spent doesn’t count?
With life insurance there Whole Life, where you pay until you’ve paid enough to make the value of the policy and then you stop. This problem could CERTAINLY be fixed. It will have to be legislated, though.
That’s an entirely different argument, and your math is way off.
You pay $2000 a month for 360 months
I’m pretty sure the insurance is closer to $2000 per year. So $2000 per year for 30 years is $60000, which is not going to cover the total loss on a $300000 home. $2000 per month would be on something like a $10million home.
They’ve been collecting insurance payments on those houses WITHOUT LOSSES for many months.
If there had been no losses, people wouldn’t have needed insurance. There are 1000s of homes insured and some percentage of them will have had some amountof payouts from the pool of money. Insurance pays out for lots of different types of losses, and they have to weigh the risks. They’re not charities.
Don’t get me wrong, insurance is a racket and they will do everything they can to deny coverage and stuff the pockets of their investors. But if you want to force them to provide coverage when there’s pretty much guaranteed losses, they will just exit the business altogether.
I lived in a high risk area, in a $300k 1400 ft² home, and my insurance was 10k a year. I scaled the numbers up for California. You don’t think those people weren’t already paying through the nose? You think they were insuring a 3M home for 2k a year in a high risk area?
Pacific Palisades had 2 fires in 2009, nothing compared to this, and none of these houses were affected. No other major disasters.
I’m sorry, I want to respect your opinion, but you live in a dream world.
And 6 months ago they saw that they were likely to take major losses insuring homes in that area so they stopped renewing policies. So the options were to use the last-resort state provided insurance (FAIR Act), go uninsured, or move. A lot of people didn’t switch to the state insurance.
They’ve been collecting insurance payments on those houses WITHOUT LOSSES for many months. What happened to the money they paid over the years? Just consumed and forgotten by insurance companies? You pay $2000 a month for 360 months and then they decide to drop you and you have no coverage? That $700k+ you spent doesn’t count?
With life insurance there Whole Life, where you pay until you’ve paid enough to make the value of the policy and then you stop. This problem could CERTAINLY be fixed. It will have to be legislated, though.
That’s an entirely different argument, and your math is way off.
I’m pretty sure the insurance is closer to $2000 per year. So $2000 per year for 30 years is $60000, which is not going to cover the total loss on a $300000 home. $2000 per month would be on something like a $10million home.
If there had been no losses, people wouldn’t have needed insurance. There are 1000s of homes insured and some percentage of them will have had some amountof payouts from the pool of money. Insurance pays out for lots of different types of losses, and they have to weigh the risks. They’re not charities.
Don’t get me wrong, insurance is a racket and they will do everything they can to deny coverage and stuff the pockets of their investors. But if you want to force them to provide coverage when there’s pretty much guaranteed losses, they will just exit the business altogether.
I lived in a high risk area, in a $300k 1400 ft² home, and my insurance was 10k a year. I scaled the numbers up for California. You don’t think those people weren’t already paying through the nose? You think they were insuring a 3M home for 2k a year in a high risk area?
Pacific Palisades had 2 fires in 2009, nothing compared to this, and none of these houses were affected. No other major disasters.
I’m sorry, I want to respect your opinion, but you live in a dream world.
I didn’t say 3M home I said 300K home. https://www.policygenius.com/homeowners-insurance/california/los-angeles/
LIFE’S TO SHORT TO COUNT ZEROS!!!