Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr. K

They had Hurricane coverage, and for *some* reason thought that they were protected from a hurricane's damage, and even more farfetched, they believed that all that water was from a hurricane's storm surge. Imagine their surprise when their insurance companies informed them that they hadn't lost their property to a hurricane, but to a flood.

Many of these houses weren't on a "flood plain" and had never had flooding. I can see that many people paid their premiums believing that they were covered from the thing they were at risk of - a hurricane.

I'm not well versed in the national flood insurance program since I don't live in a flood plain, but it's my understanding that one can't just get national flood insurance by paying a premium, it's not even offered unless the whole community agrees to certain federal stipulations concerning exsisting and future building codes.

Is there a difference between a "flood" and a "storm surge"?


132 posted on 09/21/2005 11:01:44 AM PDT by Euphemy (Proud to be a South Mississippian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Euphemy
But for the winds of the hurricane, the water would not have surged.

"Hello, God? See, Allstate won't honor my claim, so I'm going for the ultimate deep pockets. And since Mother Nature claims you are her boss...."

135 posted on 09/21/2005 11:05:43 AM PDT by blu (only insiders knew about the AK-monkey-pumpers smack-down.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson