Flooding is separate from typical US home insurance and many homeowners are not adequately covered

As millions of US residents begin working to file insurance claims on their homes in the aftermath of Hurricanes Helene and Milton, many could be denied, particularly if their homes were damaged by flooding.

A quirk in the US home insurance market is that flood insurance is separate from typical home insurance, which usually covers wind damage from hurricanes but not flooding. Homeowners must purchase flood insurance separately if they want their homes protected against flooding.

And many don’t. In some areas where Hurricane Helene hit the hardest, less than 1% of homes had flood insurance when the storm hit. In Buncombe county in North Carolina, home to Asheville, only 0.9% of homes had flood insurance, according to data from the Insurance Information Institute.

The number of people with flood insurance in Florida, which was hit by Hurricane Milton two weeks after parts of the state were battered by Helene, is higher than in other parts of the country. But still, the take-up is low. In Sarasota county, which took a direct hit from Milton, just 23% of residents have flood insurance.

  • Professorozone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    6 months ago

    Hmmm, I don’t get this. Usually if you’re in a flood area the mortgage company requires flood insurance. If you don’t get it, they get it for you and send you the bill.

    But as most are saying, it’s a scam. They will tell you you have flood insurance without mentioning that there are three different kinds of flood damage. Rising water is the one most of us think of, but there is flood damage cause by plumbing issues and finally wind driven water. To a home owner, it’s water damage. To an insurance company it’s an opportunity to either charge you three times or deny your claim.

    It’s great!

    • BottleOfAlkahest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      6 months ago

      Asheville is in the mountains, one of the reasons it was such a big story is that no one expected Asheville to flood. I’m not surprised almost no one up there has flood insurance.

    • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      Flood areas are defined as somewhere where there’s a 1 in a 100 chance of a flood happening. The problem is all the calculations for that are based on historic data, which is to say they don’t take into account climate change.

    • PlantJam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Water damage to your house is generally covered unless it’s specifically excluded (flood). Plumbing leaks are usually covered, and the same goes for wind driven rain.

      When it comes to your belongings, coverage is the opposite, meaning nothing is covered unless the policy specifically says it is. Plumbing water damage is covered, but wind driven rain is only covered if an opening is created by the wind or hail. This could be as minor as a missing shingle.

      Flood damage (the rising water kind) isn’t covered by homeowners insurance for the building or your belongings, but renters policies do typically cover flood damage.

  • RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    6 months ago

    It’s the dental of home insurance.

    We carry flood insurance, it’s cheap if you are not in a flood zone.

    But the home insurance in Florida is mostly just a scam to suck money out of the state. Company is incorporated, funnels money from policies into the pockets of the rich, then they go bust and fail to pay claims. Then the same people start all over with a different name. While cherry picking policies and leaving the riskier for the state to insure.

    If Florida would kick all the insurers out and put everyone on Citizens it would be better. I really only feel “insured” when we fall onto the state plan; and if I had a spare half million you bet I’d self insure and get an umbrella policy for liability, not keep paying those assholes for nothing.

  • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    6 months ago

    Yeah, that sounds about right. People think there’s a standard “full coverage” and then when something happens, suddenly the insurance company wants to make sure you understand the policy.

    Taking those calls must be heartbreaking (though I’m sure the higher ups could care less).

    • madcaesar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yea it’s full coverage the way heath insurance is full coverage, eyes, teeth and mental health are not included. It’s fucked up

    • PlantJam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Another thing to know about ahead of time is replacement cost coverage. I knew something that only had cash value coverage for their roof in addition to an $8000 deductible. They got a check from the insurance for about $200 and had to pay the rest out of pocket.

      • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        That is way too common. With how expensive everything is, people can’t afford to really protect themselves. Shit hits the fan and they have a crazy deductible and the most basic coverage because that’s probably still $100 a month. You find out that paying your premiums was no better than setting that money on fire every month.

  • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    What would actually happen if there was $100,000 of damage or more to like 100,000 houses in that area. FEMA only pays less than $50k. And according to the studies they always talk about, most people don’t have $50k to fix their house. Would they just be homeless? The mold growth from all that water would make the houses unlivable.

  • Zugyuk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Sounds like the preexisting conditions situation. We need Obama 2.0 to make Obamainsure

  • beanlink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Insurance was always a last case resort and not submitting claims because of a paint chip. Now that climate change is showing its face and you built along a beach which everyone has warned you about and needs constant replenishing. Sorry if I am having a little trouble finding some empathy here.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Note that a lot of the people that are in trouble this time are hundreds of miles inland in mountains… .

      • beanlink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Climate change affects the entire planet. I was simply pointing the most obvious example. What happened in west NC is tragic but this is the new reality we face and the entire south and eastern coast line requires a rethink of how we insure and more importantly how we build in the future.

  • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Here is a bit of a different take. The entire economy is based on businesses taking risk. Every start up is a risk, and the majority fail. But that is what you have to do in business to get ahead. Now translate that to something like flood insurance. Would a sartup business pay for that if it wasn’t required. No way. They would say if it happens the business just fails. So costs and pay are based on the same concept. Some people would end up destitute in retirement if they paid for all the insurance they should have.