Flood insurance and cover for overland flooding

by Simon 30 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  blondie

  Floodi nsurace....considered, yes. Don't live in a flood plain. Insurance companies look at the history of floods in your area. Flood insurance can be purchased through the federal government. When buying a home with a mortage, flood liability is automatically checked to see if you qualify for the mortgage.

  You can still have flooded basements that do not come under flood insurance....so check it carefully.

  I have family that have been flooded twice in the last 8 years, and are currently under a flood warning...but they clean up and stay there.

  http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program

  (I insure against fire too)
• 

  Mary

  Glad to hear you guys are okay Simon. I was just watching the videos of downtown Calgary and thought of you and your family. Never thought I'd see Calgary under water!

  I don't have flood insurance because if the waters ever got up to my house, you could kiss half of Southern Ontario good-bye. Either that or start building an ark. Normally when disasters like this happen, the government declares it a 'disaster zone' and provides monies to help people re-build.
• 

  BreathoftheIndianNose

  Those two articles were interesting Simon. One said that Flood Insurance isn't yet available in Canada.

  I find that to be very surprising. I've never acctually thought about this issue much before. I guess it takes

  a flood in your own city to get you thinking, unfortunately. It is an interesting issue though, and I'm still

  trying to figure out my possition on it. First of all, I'm curious as to what kind of relief (aka: our tax dollars) the government will

  provide. And second, like you said, is this fair?

  If flood insurance is not even an option in Canada, then much of the blame cannot be put on those people who live close

  to the river without purchasing insurance because its not available. But if it were... by them not purchasing it, I think they bear

  the blame. Living along a river is a desirable location, but also a dangerous one. Every river overflows at one time or another,

  every flood plain will flood one day. These things are sure as the setting sun. So to build or buy a house in a dangerous location,

  one must take the risk knowing that one day, whenever that day is, disaster will ensue. And if those people decide not to

  protect themselves and then ask for money handouts from the people who made a more calculated decision, I say,

  sorry for your loss, but shit happens, and you put your money in the wrong pot.

  That all being said, if it is true that Canadian insurance companies don't even offer flood insurance, then I'm willing offer my time

  and money to aid those families who got flooded out.

  From a Calgarian who's still high and dry,

  Indiannose
• 

  TotallyADD

  No Nathan Nates. I live in NW PA. And according to our insurance agent flood insurance is almost worthless. Now that could be bacause in PA the laws don't allow to cover much. I don't know. I was just merely saying was our insurance agent said to us. We live in a valley with a creek behind our house. Way the policy are written here it is so vague they are a joke. If in Canada they hae good flood insurance that will cover them. More power to them. It just is not happening here that's all. Totally ADD
• 

  Nathan Natas

  " but now NN says..."

  I could be lying. After all, there is absolutely no way that anyone could check to see if insurance was available for specific threats. AND I make money every time I mislead the unsuspecting. I use that money to pay for the earthquake insurance that it is impossible for me to have.

  It's all very diabolical.
• 

  new22day

  LOL. NN - you're very sensitive. I wasn't suggesting you were "lying" at all. I was surprised and interested to hear that you have Earth quake insurance. I learned something from your post. Chill out dude. The world ain't so angry.
• 

  Nice_Dream

  We live in BC and had a minor leak in our basement a couple days ago due to unusually heavy rain. We found out our insurance no longer covers ground water leakage (not available since 2011). But we are still covered for accidental flooding due to appliances, sewer backup, water main breaks, and ice damning. With some policies you need to pay extra for these coverages, so it is good to double check. Our insurance is through TD Meloche Mennox.

  I'm hoping our Government and fellow Canadians will help out with the costs for the affected homeowners, it must be devastating to lose your house and have to start over.
• 

  Simon

  So if tax payers have to reimburse them for their loss, how do tax payers benefit when the house next to the creek rises in value because of the picturesque location?
• 

  Scully

  how do tax payers benefit when the house next to the creek rises in value because of the picturesque location?

  Well property value takes into consideration the actual history of the property, which, if it included a major flood, fire, earthquake or other natural disaster, is supposed to be disclosed when the property goes on the market. Such insults to the property have the potential to cause unseen structural damages to the house that are not fixed along with the cosmetic repairs. Things like warped beams and joists, mold and so on.

  In other words, those homes that have suffered damages or are in the areas where other homes have been damaged, would also take a hit in property value, which would take a long time to recover from, regardless of how nice the location is. Buyers tend to be a lot more educated in terms of what they are looking for in a home, and try to do their due diligence and learn about the neighbourhood where they are planning to buy. They are also demanding home inspections before signing on the dotted line to make what is likely one of their biggest investments ever.

  We had a new development in our area about 10 years ago, shortly after we bought our home. What I knew from having lived in this part of Ottawa for almost 15 years was that the new development was being built on marshland that had been filled in. Sure enough, there was a problem within 3 to 5 years where peoples' homes were sinking, requiring major excavation and installation of 'floats' under the foundations. People were displaced from their homes for weeks while the New Home Warranty repairs were carried out. Despite the repairs and reassurances from engineers that the homes are fixed and that there should be no further problems, values of the affected homes are impacted compared to unaffected homes in the same development, and in some cases on the same street. It doesn't change what the homeowners had to pay for the property when it was purchased, but it will impact resale values. Now more than ever, when people are buying a home and they see a house with a spectacularly reduced price compared to others in the neighbourhood, they are suspicious, and rightly so.

  You asked how taxpayers benefit when property values increase in a desirable location. I should think that these properties carry a higher property tax based on the value of the property and the house that sits on the property. Perhaps that is a topic that could be addressed at the city council level, because homes that were impacted by the flooding certainly (and rightly) required more city resources in the wake of the disaster, while other locations that weren't affected may have had increased wait times for emergency services (fire, police, ambulance) that were tied up while tending to flood victims.
• 

  Simon

  I guess the question comes down to whether the cost due to personal choices should be borne by the people who make them or society in general.

  There will be unfairness in whatever system is used so maybe the most practical and easiest to work would be the most pragmatic.