by InsInvestigator » Mon Dec 01, 2008 08:34 pm
Hello everyone. I need your help this time.
One of my rental houses, sits in what someone deemed a flood zone. I have owned the house for 17 years and have never seen water anywhere close to the house. The house is old (built in the early 40s) sits on a corner lot and is slightly higher than all the houses around it (all built afterwards). If water were to get to my front door, the porches across the street would be under 2 feet of water.
Anyway, a few months ago, Allstate sent me a letter advising me that I had to pick one of two coverage opitions regarding my house. One of these options would raise the cost of my flood insurance almost $200 per year. I, of course, chose the other option which left everything as it were.
The lender, it seems, also received a copy of this document and decided the extra coverage was exactly what they wanted. It was actually their choice - and not mine- that was put into effect and my premiums went up.
After seeing this, I wrote my insurance carrier a letter letting them know how I felt about what had happened and instructing them to leave my coverage alone - which was done.
A few days later, I received a letter from Allstate advising me that I actually had no say in the matter and the lender had made my decision for me - increased coverage / higher premium.
Well, as one might imagine, I am about a heartbeat away from calling my carrier and telling them that if they are interested in keeping my business (on all the houses) they keep me as far away fom Allstate as possible.
I wanted to get some of your inputs first. Thanks for the help, Mark
One of my rental houses, sits in what someone deemed a flood zone. I have owned the house for 17 years and have never seen water anywhere close to the house. The house is old (built in the early 40s) sits on a corner lot and is slightly higher than all the houses around it (all built afterwards). If water were to get to my front door, the porches across the street would be under 2 feet of water.
Anyway, a few months ago, Allstate sent me a letter advising me that I had to pick one of two coverage opitions regarding my house. One of these options would raise the cost of my flood insurance almost $200 per year. I, of course, chose the other option which left everything as it were.
The lender, it seems, also received a copy of this document and decided the extra coverage was exactly what they wanted. It was actually their choice - and not mine- that was put into effect and my premiums went up.
After seeing this, I wrote my insurance carrier a letter letting them know how I felt about what had happened and instructing them to leave my coverage alone - which was done.
A few days later, I received a letter from Allstate advising me that I actually had no say in the matter and the lender had made my decision for me - increased coverage / higher premium.
Well, as one might imagine, I am about a heartbeat away from calling my carrier and telling them that if they are interested in keeping my business (on all the houses) they keep me as far away fom Allstate as possible.
I wanted to get some of your inputs first. Thanks for the help, Mark
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 01:07 pm Post Subject:
Mark, I'm doing some 'investigating' and will post what i find, but on the surface i think you're screwed...you 'might' be able to get them to reduce the amount by the balance of your note...have you tried that argument yet?
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 02:19 pm Post Subject:
Yes, Lori would perhaps be the best person to give us a clue as to whether it is possible for Allstate to put the burden on you solely because the lender has chosen the first coverage option. My question would be - why did they ask you regarding your choice in the first place then?
ArindamSenIndies
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 05:41 pm Post Subject:
ArindamSenIndies, that was also my question. Even though they sent the document with which I could decide which coverage option I wanted - the choice wasn't mine to make.
Lori, I'm not sure I understand the term "screwed". If I wanted, couldn't I just drop the coverage altogether and find another carrier? Or would the new carrier also go by what the lender wants, therefore leaving me in the same predicament?
Thanks, Mark
Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:50 pm Post Subject:
have you tried that argument yet?
Lori, any update from you on this one??
Lori, I'm not sure I understand the term "screwed".
I think all she meant was that you're somewhat fixed...and have limited options..
Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:27 am Post Subject:
Sorry Mark, our computer was down a few weeks, i was working on my laptop and somehow missed this update...
Lori, I'm not sure I understand the term "screwed". If I wanted, couldn't I just drop the coverage altogether and find another carrier? Or would the new carrier also go by what the lender wants, therefore leaving me in the same predicament?
That is EXACTLY what I mean by screwed...more than likely it is going to be required no matter who it is...some property is REQUIRED to carry flood ins...my poor brother, got to closing on his second home before he found out their dream house (at the time) was required to have flood ins...you'd have to know the area, but it's a joke...where I live is much more likely to flood that this house, and I don't need it...in fact his area hadn't flooded for OVER 100 years...he fought and fought the whole time he lived there and never did get it off...but yes that's what i meant my screwed.Add your comment