Australian Politics Forum - There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,

Back to OzPolitic.com

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › General Discussion › General Board › There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2 3

Send Topic

Print

There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage, (Read 17333 times)

aussiefree2ride

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3538

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #15 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:18pm

qikvtec wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 8:55am:

Quote:

There are three types of flood insurance coverage. I see, now they tell us. Sad

Sad

Actually it's in the Product Disclosure Statement of any insurance policy, by law in fact.

There is also a needle in the second last haystack, if you happen to be highly trained in looking for needles, and have the time to look, you should find it. One thing I`m trying to get across is that the insurance representative should be required by law to SPECIFICALLY and CLEARLY state the limitations of each flood insurance product. Too many people who thought they were covered, aren`t.

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

male

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #16 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:28pm

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:12pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 12:37pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 6:29am:

As per usual sook, you are barking up the wrong knee. The issue isn`t 'flood insurance", the issue is the fact that even with "flood insurance", in the event of a large scale flood, insurance companies simply aren`t big enough to pay out, hence the "act of god" clause.

Insurance policies (in Australia) list things that are covered and things that are NOT covered.

I don't recall seeing under the NOT covered list, an exclusion saying Act of God!

For want of a better term, there are "Acts of God" that are covered and there are "Acts of God" that are Not covered.

There are also "Non-Acts of God" things that are covered and "Non-Acts of God" things, which are Not covered.

To all, I strongly suggest, you read the policy, before you buy it and you ensure that the major covers you are likely to need, are covered.

If not, then look around!

That said, it may be likely that some covers, will start to become difficult get, at any price!

You are totally clueless.

Really, why?

Specifically, where am I incorrect?

IP Logged

Team Froggie

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7406
Sydney
Gender: male

male

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #17 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:58pm

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:14pm:

Please delete wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

"Boswell is suggesting that the flood component of all insurance premiums be directed to central fund, in an attempt to eliminate this fault in the system"

Is this a new thing? That wasn't what he was suggesting the other day - he was proposing to add a levy to ALL insurance policies, to build a fund for natural disasters.

Do you even understand your hero's proposal?

Keep working on it, you might get there one day, sorry, can`t wait for you.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/nationals-senator-ron-boswell-p...

"QUEENSLAND Nationals senator Ron Boswell has proposed a national insurance pool to cover flood disasters.
Senator Boswell's proposal, which he hopes to raise with Tony Abbott, is centred on a small impost that would be linked to household insurance policies and collected by government.

The funds would be funnelled into a national pool."

"....is centred on a small impost...."

You were saying, af2r???

"What's in store for me in the direction I don't take?"-Jack Kerouac.

IP Logged

aussiefree2ride

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3538

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #18 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:03pm

Team Froggie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:58pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:14pm:

Please delete wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

"Boswell is suggesting that the flood component of all insurance premiums be directed to central fund, in an attempt to eliminate this fault in the system"

Is this a new thing? That wasn't what he was suggesting the other day - he was proposing to add a levy to ALL insurance policies, to build a fund for natural disasters.

Do you even understand your hero's proposal?

Keep working on it, you might get there one day, sorry, can`t wait for you.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/nationals-senator-ron-boswell-p...

"QUEENSLAND Nationals senator Ron Boswell has proposed a national insurance pool to cover flood disasters.
Senator Boswell's proposal, which he hopes to raise with Tony Abbott, is centred on a small impost that would be linked to household insurance policies and collected by government.

The funds would be funnelled into a national pool."

You were saying, af2r???

That`s the one, it has some merit & is worth discussing. As flood insurance presently stands, each insurance company has an "out" clause, "act of God" clause which effectively lets them off the hook re disaster claims, this obviously isn`t fair, and it`s not the best option by a long shot.

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

male

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #19 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:32pm

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:03pm:

Team Froggie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:58pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:14pm:

Please delete wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

"Boswell is suggesting that the flood component of all insurance premiums be directed to central fund, in an attempt to eliminate this fault in the system"

Is this a new thing? That wasn't what he was suggesting the other day - he was proposing to add a levy to ALL insurance policies, to build a fund for natural disasters.

Do you even understand your hero's proposal?

Keep working on it, you might get there one day, sorry, can`t wait for you.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/nationals-senator-ron-boswell-p...

"QUEENSLAND Nationals senator Ron Boswell has proposed a national insurance pool to cover flood disasters.
Senator Boswell's proposal, which he hopes to raise with Tony Abbott, is centred on a small impost that would be linked to household insurance policies and collected by government.

The funds would be funnelled into a national pool."

You were saying, af2r???

That`s the one, it has some merit & is worth discussing. As flood insurance presently stands, each insurance company has an "out" clause, "act of God" clause which effectively lets them off the hook re disaster claims, this obviously isn`t fair, and it`s not the best option by a long shot.

That is incorrect!

Also, I would not be in favour of Australian Insurers being forced into a National Flood cover, thus forcing all premiums dramatically higher, no matter where you live or where your business may be!

I would also be against, the states &/or the Federal government being forced into a national Flood pool, as that would mean increased costs for all consumers.

I would be in favour of a re-examination of where housing & businesses may be allowed to build &/or re-build, to shift away from Flood prone areas!

IP Logged

aussiefree2ride

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3538

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #20 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:48pm

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:32pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:03pm:

Team Froggie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:58pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:14pm:

Please delete wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

"Boswell is suggesting that the flood component of all insurance premiums be directed to central fund, in an attempt to eliminate this fault in the system"

Is this a new thing? That wasn't what he was suggesting the other day - he was proposing to add a levy to ALL insurance policies, to build a fund for natural disasters.

Do you even understand your hero's proposal?

Keep working on it, you might get there one day, sorry, can`t wait for you.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/nationals-senator-ron-boswell-p...

"QUEENSLAND Nationals senator Ron Boswell has proposed a national insurance pool to cover flood disasters.
Senator Boswell's proposal, which he hopes to raise with Tony Abbott, is centred on a small impost that would be linked to household insurance policies and collected by government.

The funds would be funnelled into a national pool."

You were saying, af2r???

That`s the one, it has some merit & is worth discussing. As flood insurance presently stands, each insurance company has an "out" clause, "act of God" clause which effectively lets them off the hook re disaster claims, this obviously isn`t fair, and it`s not the best option by a long shot.

That is incorrect!

Also, I would not be in favour of Australian Insurers being forced into a National Flood cover, thus forcing all premiums dramatically higher, no matter where you live or where your business may be!

I would also be against, the states &/or the Federal government being forced into a national Flood pool, as that would mean increased costs for all consumers.

I would be in favour of a re-examination of where housing & businesses may be allowed to build &/or re-build, to shift away from Flood prone areas!

Do you prefer the present weak, unreliable system? Grin

Grin

Grin

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

male

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #21 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:52pm

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:48pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:32pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:03pm:

Team Froggie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:58pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:14pm:

Please delete wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

"Boswell is suggesting that the flood component of all insurance premiums be directed to central fund, in an attempt to eliminate this fault in the system"

Is this a new thing? That wasn't what he was suggesting the other day - he was proposing to add a levy to ALL insurance policies, to build a fund for natural disasters.

Do you even understand your hero's proposal?

Keep working on it, you might get there one day, sorry, can`t wait for you.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/nationals-senator-ron-boswell-p...

"QUEENSLAND Nationals senator Ron Boswell has proposed a national insurance pool to cover flood disasters.
Senator Boswell's proposal, which he hopes to raise with Tony Abbott, is centred on a small impost that would be linked to household insurance policies and collected by government.

The funds would be funnelled into a national pool."

You were saying, af2r???

That`s the one, it has some merit & is worth discussing. As flood insurance presently stands, each insurance company has an "out" clause, "act of God" clause which effectively lets them off the hook re disaster claims, this obviously isn`t fair, and it`s not the best option by a long shot.

That is incorrect!

Also, I would not be in favour of Australian Insurers being forced into a National Flood cover, thus forcing all premiums dramatically higher, no matter where you live or where your business may be!

I would also be against, the states &/or the Federal government being forced into a national Flood pool, as that would mean increased costs for all consumers.

I would be in favour of a re-examination of where housing & businesses may be allowed to build &/or re-build, to shift away from Flood prone areas!

Do you prefer the present weak, unreliable system? Grin

Grin

Grin

NO, I would prefer what I recommended!

IP Logged

aussiefree2ride

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3538

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #22 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 7:15pm

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:52pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:48pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:32pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 2:03pm:

Team Froggie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:58pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 1:14pm:

Please delete wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

"Boswell is suggesting that the flood component of all insurance premiums be directed to central fund, in an attempt to eliminate this fault in the system"

Is this a new thing? That wasn't what he was suggesting the other day - he was proposing to add a levy to ALL insurance policies, to build a fund for natural disasters.

Do you even understand your hero's proposal?

Keep working on it, you might get there one day, sorry, can`t wait for you.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/nationals-senator-ron-boswell-p...

"QUEENSLAND Nationals senator Ron Boswell has proposed a national insurance pool to cover flood disasters.
Senator Boswell's proposal, which he hopes to raise with Tony Abbott, is centred on a small impost that would be linked to household insurance policies and collected by government.

The funds would be funnelled into a national pool."

You were saying, af2r???

That`s the one, it has some merit & is worth discussing. As flood insurance presently stands, each insurance company has an "out" clause, "act of God" clause which effectively lets them off the hook re disaster claims, this obviously isn`t fair, and it`s not the best option by a long shot.

That is incorrect!

Also, I would not be in favour of Australian Insurers being forced into a National Flood cover, thus forcing all premiums dramatically higher, no matter where you live or where your business may be!

I would also be against, the states &/or the Federal government being forced into a national Flood pool, as that would mean increased costs for all consumers.

I would be in favour of a re-examination of where housing & businesses may be allowed to build &/or re-build, to shift away from Flood prone areas!

Do you prefer the present weak, unreliable system? Grin

Grin

Grin

NO, I would prefer what I recommended!

If all you are talking about is "I would be in favour of a re-examination of where housing & businesses may be allowed to build &/or re-build, to shift away from Flood prone areas!"

My question to you is, considering the area of this recent Queensland flood is larger than the entire State of NSW, or bigger than France & Germany combined. You obviously can`t realistically expect your "plan" to work?

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47446
At my desk.

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #23 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 7:40pm

If the suggestion is to force all insurerees to get flood insurance regardless of where they live, then I would be against it, as it would force those who make a wise choice of house location to subsidise those who make a poor choice, and remove the disincentive to invest in flood prone properties.

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

WWW

IP Logged

qikvtec

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1846
Queensland

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #24 - Jan 14^th, 2011 at 9:21pm

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 7:15pm:

My question to you is, considering the area of this recent Queensland flood is larger than the entire State of NSW, or bigger than France & Germany combined. You obviously can`t realistically expect your "plan" to work?

With respect, vast tracts of that is uninhabited and frequently uninhabitable.

There should be consideration to perhaps not reoccupying some of the areas, but even that isn't really feasible given the scale of the task.

Politicians and Nappies need to be changed often and for the same reason.

One trouble with political jokes is that they often get elected.

Alan Joyce for PM

IP Logged

whatsforme

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 573

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #25 - Jan 15^th, 2011 at 6:18am

Also, I would not be in favour of Australian Insurers being forced into a National Flood cover, thus forcing all premiums dramatically higher, no matter where you live or where your business may be!

I would also be against, the states &/or the Federal government being forced into a national Flood pool, as that would mean increased costs for all consumers.

I would be in favour of a re-examination of where housing & businesses may be allowed to build &/or re-build, to shift away from Flood prone areas! [/quote]

what, no graph. You disappoint me dopey.

IP Logged

aussiefree2ride

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3538

Re: There Are Three Types Of Flood Insurance Coverage,
Reply #26 - Jan 15^th, 2011 at 7:31am

qikvtec wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 9:21pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Jan 14^th, 2011 at 7:15pm:

My question to you is, considering the area of this recent Queensland flood is larger than the entire State of NSW, or bigger than France & Germany combined. You obviously can`t realistically expect your "plan" to work?

With respect, vast tracts of that is uninhabited and frequently uninhabitable.

There should be consideration to perhaps not reoccupying some of the areas, but even that isn't really feasible given the scale of the task.

Agreed, but the point I was making is that for the State to function, there has to be some exposure to flood risk. I`m also in agreement that, although we have a 100 year rule for flood zoning, there has, in recent years been too much built in lower areas.

Your point re reoccupying flood prone areas is on the money also, this is sure to be part of the new equation.

IP Logged

Equitist

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW

Re: Shonky Flood Insurance Coverage
Reply #27 - Jan 19^th, 2011 at 7:20pm

The reports of dog acts by insurance companies are starting to flow in...

How can insurance assessors insist on proof of ownership and other evidence from people who have had all (or much) of their paperwork, photos and possessions inundated and/or washed away by freak flood events...!?

I, for one, hope that someone establishes a public name and shame site/page in the industry's dishonour...

PS I thought it was best to tack this post onto an existing thread, rather than start a new one which is likely to overlap considerably.

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!

IP Logged

qikvtec

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1846
Queensland

Re: Shonky Flood Insurance Coverage
Reply #28 - Jan 19^th, 2011 at 7:28pm

Equitist wrote on Jan 19^th, 2011 at 7:20pm:

The reports of dog acts by insurance companies are starting to flow in...

How can insurance assessors insist on proof of ownership and other evidence from people who have had all (or much) of their paperwork, photos and possessions inundated and/or washed away by freak flood events...!?

I, for one, hope that someone establishes a public name and shame site/page in the industry's dishonour...

PS I thought it was best to tack this post onto an existing thread, rather than start a new one which is likely to overlap considerably.

With respect Thy, I would hope an insurance company insisted on proof of identity and ownership before they sent a payment for my total loss, imagine you lost your home whilst you were away on an extended holiday only to come back to find some scammer has cashed in on your insurance policy.

Politicians and Nappies need to be changed often and for the same reason.

One trouble with political jokes is that they often get elected.

Alan Joyce for PM

IP Logged

Equitist

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW

Re: Shonky Flood Insurance Coverage
Reply #29 - Jan 19^th, 2011 at 7:48pm

qikvtec wrote on Jan 19^th, 2011 at 7:28pm:

Equitist wrote on Jan 19^th, 2011 at 7:20pm:

The reports of dog acts by insurance companies are starting to flow in...

How can insurance assessors insist on proof of ownership and other evidence from people who have had all (or much) of their paperwork, photos and possessions inundated and/or washed away by freak flood events...!?

I, for one, hope that someone establishes a public name and shame site/page in the industry's dishonour...

PS I thought it was best to tack this post onto an existing thread, rather than start a new one which is likely to overlap considerably.

With respect Thy, I would hope an insurance company insisted on proof of identity and ownership before they sent a payment for my total loss, imagine you lost your home whilst you were away on an extended holiday only to come back to find some scammer has cashed in on your insurance policy.

Fair enough - but that's not really what I was getting at...

From the news reports, it is clear that many people will be unable provide evidence of purchase/ownership of some or most of the contents of their homes...

Some have had much of their home contents literally washed away...and have no idea where same ended up...

Others will have been affected by looting - with no means of proving one way or another (regardless of whether they will be hit with 2 excesses for more than one loss event)...

No doubt, many who have suffered inundation up to the waist or ceiling (and therefore a near-total loss of household contents) will be hit by the insurance industry's ultimate trump card - the 'averaging clause'...

Then there's those people who had an excess for flood coverage showing on the front page of their insurance schedule, only to find that buried in the detail is a pissy flood claim limit on contents...

Of course, such clauses will only apply to the minority who were actually covered for "flood" (in one or more of the 3 possible forms) in the first instance...

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!

IP Logged

Pages: 1 2 3

Send Topic

Print

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Top of this page

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge