Hurricane Ian's destruction

A Tornado popping up in Iowa after they've had watches all day isn't quite the same as a Category 5 hurricane they've told you about 5 days in advance.

5 days in advance is a bit of a stretch. Yes, the cone of uncertainty passed over the area, but even like a day before it was thought that this storm's primary damage would be farther north, and not as strong as it ended up being as this really strengthened in the final hours before landfall.

These forecast cones hit these areas enough that a lot of people can't just leave every time they get into the warned area. Not everyone can afford to pack up their stuff, their kids, their animals, etc, drive hundreds of miles away and pay hundreds per night on hotel rooms. So for a lot of people it really, effectively, is having to make a short-term decision within the last 24 hours on whether to bail.
 
There are a ton of insurance companies that refuse to issue policies in Florida because of hurricanes

I think some also depends on when your house was built.

If it was built to the newer standards and is <20 years old, you'll have a better chance getting coverage than some of the older homes that are just a matter of time before the wrong hurricane hits them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GMackey32
I think some also depends on when your house was built.

If it was built to the newer standards and is <20 years old, you'll have a better chance getting coverage than some of the older homes that are just a matter of time before the wrong hurricane hits them.
Anything from the 90's or before is expensive and really hard to insure. Insurance is brutal in Florida and a complete mess.
 
Anything from the 90's or before is expensive and really hard to insure. Insurance is brutal in Florida and a complete mess.

As it probably should be. If we aren't going to do anything to combat climate change, we are least need to deal with it. And that probably means that people need to start moving inland. Being able to insure poor decisions like rebuilding after hurricanes in a place that's going to get another hurricane seems like a bad idea.

Just like NOLA, federal dollars shouldn't go to rebuild in places that it'll happen again.
 
As it probably should be. If we aren't going to do anything to combat climate change, we are least need to deal with it. And that probably means that people need to start moving inland. Being able to insure poor decisions like rebuilding after hurricanes in a place that's going to get another hurricane seems like a bad idea.

Just like NOLA, federal dollars shouldn't go to rebuild in places that it'll happen again.
Yeah with the gulf being a warmer and warmer bathtub for hurricanes to suck up energy from It sounds like we're going to see this rapid strengthening of hurricanes before landfall more frequently. That's bad news for anywhere along the Gulf Coast.
 
There are a ton of insurance companies that refuse to issue policies in Florida because of hurricanes
And while hurricanes are obviously a major reason, an even bigger reason for the lack of competition/availability in the Florida homeowners insurance market (at least over the prior few years, when there has been relatively little Florida hurricane activity) has been the level of fraud (especially among roofing contractors) in Florida as well as the presence of unique one-way attorney's fee and assignment of benefits statutes that encourage that type of fraud.

I saw a stat the other day that while 9% of homeowners insurance claims occur in Florida, a whopping 79% (!) of homeowners insurance lawsuits occur in Florida. It's to the point where 4-5 Florida-based private insurers have gone insolvent this year (before Ian), and some Surplus insurers (who aren't subject to the same limitations on how much rate they can charge) won't even write there. It's pretty crazy, even when not accounting for hurricane/climate risk down there.
 

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron