Court rules against Katrina victims in flood insurance case
By: Pam On: Aug/3/07 - 7 Comments
NEW ORLEANS: Hurricane Katrina victims whose homes and businesses were destroyed when floodwaters breached levees in the 2005 storm cannot recover money from their insurance companies for the damages, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
Mac points out that “the language was never “ambiguous”, but very clearly state that you are not covered for flood – whether God caused it or not. Nevertheless it’s interesting that it’s Judge King who had a lot of opinions on Katrina and the aftermath as this radio transcript shows. Appears that she might have recused herself. ”
August 3, 2007 - 10:52 PM on August 3rd, 2007
Well Yes! the system is not about rights and laws. the system is business didn’t anyone tell you fools that fact, some ass said a long time ago “the business of America is Business”, not people or laws or culture of right against wrong.
Normal Business nothing here to see move along, after all Bush needs you to become Mexicans soon, so don’t ask question just ask what can I do for you master?
August 5, 2007 - 06:58 PM on August 5th, 2007
Honestly anyone living in New Orleans without FLOOD insurance is an idiot. Anyone who believes that homeowners’ insurance covers floods, hasn’t read their policy. No insurance company in their right mind would provide flood insurance to anyone living below sea level in a delta flood plain. That’s why flood insurance is underwritten by the federal government. It’s a damn shame that people aren’t smart enough to understand simple things like that. I feel sorry for those in New Orleans who lost everything, but its their responsibility to keep their insurance straight. I do have a bit of anger with the insurance companies who are refusing to pay claims to homes that were water damaged because the wind blew the roofs off and let the rain in. As far as I’m concerned, that’s NOT flood damage, that’s storm damage.
August 5, 2007 - 07:07 PM on August 5th, 2007
And NEW ORLEANS is run by that crook RAY NAGIN and the judge is probibly a liberal
August 5, 2007 - 07:28 PM on August 5th, 2007
2- Have any of the cases involving the water damage, from the roof blowing off, been ruled on in court? That to me would seem to be one that could be won. You(insurance co.) can’t argue they lived in a plain, therefore you aren’t responsible. The insurers sold them insurance, and they need to be taken to task for this. My dad has some property located on a flood plain…part of the yard floods every once in a great while, but water hasn’t ever reached the buildings…Flood insurance is expensive, but he worked with the insurance company to bring his buildings within the spec of the governments recommendations and he saved himself a ton of money, as in a 1/4 of the original price!
August 5, 2007 - 08:23 PM on August 5th, 2007
The problem is that a lot of the ones that were damaged were damaged by the storm surge. The water was way above the normal flood level because it was wind driven. Technically it’s flood damage, but it was caused by the storm. There are thousands of cases pending against insurers over “flood” damage that was storm caused.
August 5, 2007 - 08:44 PM on August 5th, 2007
Okay..that is where it does get tricky, but, you would be correct, imo.
August 11, 2007 - 12:49 AM on August 11th, 2007
Folks I will advise anyone on here to reread your homeowner’s or renter’s insurance policy. A friend’s home was burglarized and a large quantity of camping, hunting and target shooting equipment (not firearms they were in the safe that they damaged but couldn’t get open)was stolen. Because he didn’t have additional coverage for it, the insurance company only paid the maximum limit for sports equipment on the policy, about $2000. When he told me about it, I advised him that he should’ve had an additional rider on the policy to cover the additional expense of replacing the items. If you have any type of expensive collection (guns, coins, stamps, etc etc) you should absolutely make sure you have a rider added to your policy to cover the additional replacement costs. They aren’t very expensive, but are worth their weight in gold if your collection is stolen or destroyed.