Florida Tornados and Scientific Reports Bad News For Homeowners

re: Florida Tornados and Scientific Reports Bad News For Homeowners

BG Readnour — Sat, 02 May 2009 12:23:34 GMT

What is a something you can buy, but have no control over what you have to pay just to own it? The people who help you with your purchase also have no control over what you have to pay, but people walking or driving down the street DO! And people who have absolutely no financial interest in it control how much you have to pay. If a person purchases a home, they are required to pay insurance based on what the insurance company deems as "replacement cost". The value of the home is decided by "fair market value" which is determined by what a potential home buyer would pay for a house. Therefore if a person tells a real estate agent they want to make an offer on my house that is substantially higher than the real value, it is then necessary to get an appraiser that will agree that the house is worth that much money. Now it comes to the loan on the house. Getting the bank to go along with it is the next step. If all this all falls in line, although it may take several steaks and scotch to get ''er done", my "fair market value", "replacement costs, and property taxes all skyrocket as well as my neighbors. A person is required, and rightfully so, to protect the mortgage company who loaned them the money to purchase their home. Unfortunately, the insurance companies who have no investment in the property in any way, shape or form are allowed to set (almost totally arbitrary) whatever they see fit. This is grossly unfair because a homeowner who has a house that cost $150,000 and owes $25,000 on the mortgage is still required to carry the same amount of coverage that a person who purchased a $150,000 property and owes $120,000 on the property. Insurance should be set up in a manner that would allow the homeowner to set a selected amount of insurance. Mandatory rates should only include the amount of money that the mortgage company still has invested in the property, and the homeowner should be able to select the amount of insurance desired over the mortgage. For example, the homeowner above who owes $25,000 but wants to insure the property for a additional $25,000 should only be required to pay for the amount of mortgage debt plus $25,000. My insurance and taxes are currently governed by people who "guess" what my property is worth and "guess" how much it will cost to replace it! I understand the insurance companies have been operating for years with their standard methods of operation. It's long time overdue to re-structure the insurance industry.

re: Florida Tornados and Scientific Reports Bad News For Homeowners

BG Readnour — Sat, 02 May 2009 12:20:41 GMT

What is a something you can buy, but have no control over what you have to pay just to own it? The people who help you with your purchase also have no control over what you have to pay, but people walking or driving down the street DO! And people who have absolutely no financial interest in it control how much you have to pay. If a person purchases a home, they are required to pay insurance based on what the insurance company deems as "replacement cost". The value of the home is decided by "fair market value" which is determined by what a potential home buyer would pay for a house. Therefore if a person tells a real estate agent they want to make an offer on my house that is substantially higher than the real value, it is then necessary to get an appraiser that will agree that the house is worth that much money. Now it comes to the loan on the house. Getting the bank to go along with it is the next step. If all this all falls in line, although it may take several steaks and scotch to get ''er done, my "fair market value", "replacement costs, and property taxes all skyrocket as well as my neighbors. A person is required, and rightfully so, to protect the mortgage company who loaned them the money to purchase their home. Unfortunately, the insurance companies who have no investment in the property in any way, shape or form are allowed to set (almost totally arbitrary) whatever they see fit. This is grossly unfair because a homeowner who has a house that cost $150,000 and owes $25,000 on the mortgage is still required to carry the same amount of coverage that a person who purchased a $150,000 property and owes $120,000 on the property. Insurance should be set up in a manner that would allow the homeowner to set a selected amount of insurance. Mandatory rates should only include the amount of money that the mortgage company still has invested in the property, and the homeowner should be able to select the amount of insurance desired over the mortgage. For example, the homeowner above who owes $25,000 but wants to insure the property for a additional $25,000 should only be required to pay for the amount of mortgage debt plus $25,000. My insurance and taxes are currently governed by people who "guess" what my property is worth and "guess" how much it will cost to replace it! I understand the insurance companies have been operating for years with their standard methods of operation. It's long time overdue to re-structure the insurance industry.

RE:Florida Tornados and Scientific Reports Bad News For Homeowners

Dennis — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 11:00:00 GMT

I remember taking a statistics course in college. The professor used insurance companies frequently to demonstrate how the use of statisical formulas can be very beneficial for business. The professor refered to insurance companies as "rip off mobs". They have it figured using statistics, how much money they will lose given the worst case senerio, that they were accurate +/- 2% in most cases.

RE:Florida Tornados and Scientific Reports Bad News For Homeowners

Alisa — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 13:00:00 GMT

Colorado's housing market is on the rise. I love this state!

RE:Florida Tornados and Scientific Reports Bad News For Homeowners

John Ramirez — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:00:00 GMT

I recently was informed by Allstate that they would not longer cover windstorm and I already have flood insurance. I looked over the policy and they basically cover very little. I looked specifically for those words that nullify the previous statement or place serious conidtions on the statement. I am probably paying for something I will never be able to use. My question is when is this going to stop? I would rather invest that money and save it. Do we really need insurance companies?

RE:Florida Tornados and Scientific Reports Bad News For Homeowners

Jason — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 13:00:00 GMT

It looks like Montana, Utah, and Idaho, and Nevada will be seeing an increase in their State Populations. Homes are still quite affordable, and there's a ton of land.

RE:Florida Tornados and Scientific Reports Bad News For Homeowners

Lindsey — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 13:00:00 GMT

A great way out of this dilemna is changing over to an RV living style. An RV can evacuate from coming storms and still provide cheap living space. America needs more economical RV parks and fewer energy-pigging McMansions. Each enjoys coastal living, only one pays for it. Its time to beat the insurance companies at their own game and starve 'em out of business.