English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

after seeing the distruction of the current wild fires here in San Diego I am considering getting renters insurance for my apartment to cover my belongings. I told a friend this and he said that the insurance company would not pay out. Is this true? He's pretty hate filled with no reason.
My real question is, if i get insurance, should i get extra fire insurance or should it be covered in standard insurance? Does the fact that its a fire effecting many people change it?
Do the people who have standard homeowners or renters insurance get money or is there a special "Act of god clause" that will screw them?
Anyone have experience with any of this?

2007-10-23 08:30:39 · 8 answers · asked by zorro1701e 5 in Business & Finance Insurance

hey RB, i know i can't get insurance now, i'm asking for the future fires, not the current one.

2007-10-23 10:08:44 · update #1

8 answers

He's a moron. Fire insurance, and renters insurance, covers fires. You don't need "extra" fire insurance.

"Act of God" is NOT an insurance term. I've never read it in a single policy I've read, and I've read LOTS of policies.

Fire is fire, whether it starts from a candle that fell over, or a short in electrical wires, or a lightening strike, or a wildfire, or the neighbor's kid is smoking behind your bushes. It's still FIRE. And fire is COVERED.

2007-10-23 08:51:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous 7 · 1 1

Yes if there is a policy in place, it would be covered. As a renter you'd get contents coverage + loss of use if your place is torched (plus any other endorsements). Fire is not excluded unless you started it yourself. Actuaries in California would factor in the frequency of fires into their pricing, so you policy would probably cost more than the same policy in Ohio. Many companies would probably choose to leave Cali, except the state is HUGE! With such a large population, insurance Execs. have a hard time saying no. Getting the policy is the trickier part. Insurers field underwrite policies to determine if a home in Cali is higher risk of being burned: Is it near open brush? Does it have a cedar roof? Is the siding fire resistant? Does the homeowner keep combustible materials near the house? If a homeowner takes all possible precautions and the house still burns, then the insurer pays out. It is possible that some of the bigger mansions near the burn couldn't get insurance or have high deductible coverage, but if you're a movie star, you can afford to self insure.

2016-04-10 00:13:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Renter's insurance will cover fire as others have mentioned. The key to your question is the "Act of god". I've seen those exact words. If you haven't seen it, agent or not, you haven't read enough contracts.

Exclusions are rampant. They do not insure for loss either consisting of, or caused directly or indirectly by:
1) Earth Movement
2) Water Damage (depends, covers some things, not others)
3) Nuclear Hazards (Southern Calif - look out for San Onafre)
4) Inadequate zoning or construction
5) Loss by civil authorities to prevent spread of fire
6) Interruption of power or other utility service originating off premises
7) Neglect of an insured to protect property
8) War, including undeclared war, civil war, insurreection, rebellion, revolution, or warlike act by military personnel (discharge of a nuclear wapon shall be deemed a warlike act even if accidental)
9) Freezing of water leakages if building is vacant
10) Freezing or thawing of water or ice
11) Theft in or to dwelling under construction if building vacant for more than 30 days before breakin
12) Vandalism (same 30 day rule)
13) wear and tear, marring, deteriotion, mechanical breakdown, birds, insects, vermin, rodents, mold, rust, smog, smoke, pollutants, insecticides, settlilng, cracking, shrinking.

Point is... they cover a lot, except everything they don't cover. If they think you've taken care of your house reasonably well, and (a) government hasn't purposely destroyed it (not necessarily ours), and a natural disaster hasn't taken it... then yeah, you're covered.

2007-10-23 12:28:54 · answer #3 · answered by Zeltar 6 · 0 0

Frankly I don't know about the wild fires but I suspect there is some kind of clause that might exempt them if you're in an area prone to wild fires.

But you should still get renter's insurance. There are enough run of the mill, every day disasters to make renter's insurance a good idea.

2007-10-23 08:45:25 · answer #4 · answered by bdancer222 7 · 1 0

By now, insurance companies have suspended agents binding authority and will not take any new business while the fires are still raging. In other words, you won't be able to get renters insurance. This keeps people from doing what you are thinking about doing.

If you had purchased renters insurance before the binding authority had been suspended, then you would have had coverage to the limits of your policy.

2007-10-23 08:44:06 · answer #5 · answered by RB 5 · 1 1

Renter's and homeowner's insurance does cover fires. However, at least in California, they do not cover any damage resulting from earthquakes. (Coverage for damage resulting from earthquakes can be obtained from the California Earthquake Authority, if you want it.)

2007-10-23 09:23:39 · answer #6 · answered by StephenWeinstein 7 · 0 0

I'd call a local agent. They'll be more than happy to give you a legit answer. Beware of Allstate/Sears insurance. I've heard many, many horror stories regarding their claims process (or lack of).

2007-10-23 08:44:41 · answer #7 · answered by Kalifornia Citizen 2 · 0 0

my friend tried to get insurance yesterday morning and couldn't...good luck

2007-10-23 09:03:01 · answer #8 · answered by maxtonamvl 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers