Ohmigod... the insurance paid off....

[politicat]

We had a house fire in December. It was totally destroyed.

We fought with the fire department, the police and the insurance company through the end of January. (Note: Volunteer fire departments are not the best educated fire fighters out there...) At that point, we figured it was a loss and they weren't going to pay.

In February, we got a letter stating that, even though we had had the same insurance policy for nine years, and even though we had never been late with nor missed any payment, that the policy had a rider that stated that any claim in the first 90 days of a policy year could be denied for any reason. The fire happened on day 87 of the policy year.

In March, we got a letter stating that we could appeal, and our mortgage company told us to do so. We had pretty much no hope, however.

We got a letter today telling us that the insurance company issued a check for the full amount left on the mortgage!!!! The appeal worked!

Yay! Hooray! For once, insurance paid off!!!

(So now I have to amend our 2005 taxes, but that doesn't bother me at all.)

[NMDemDist2]

1. no wonder you were a wreck! What great news Pcat!

:woohoo:

[politicat]

5. Yep. Entirely crazy...

I thought we were going to be paying that mortgage until the Atlantic boiled away.

I'm still a bit stunned, but I've got that letter scanned into the computer, so we can't lose it!

[Stinky The Clown]

2. "Back" ... say goodbye to 'Load"

Good for you! And congrats on your perseverance.

[politicat]

6. ?

I'm confused (Which is not unusual.)

[Stinky The Clown]

8. Translation ....... "That's a load off your back"

[troubleinwinter]

3. WHAT????!!!

"any claim in the first 90 days of a policy year could be denied for any reason"

You'd had the policy for nine years? It's like forcing you to play Russian Roulette that your loss should happen in the last 9 mnths of a policy year??!!

Egads. Never heard of such a thing. Never would have IMAGINED such a crazy thing!

[politicat]

4. The large print giveth and the small print taketh away.

Things deep in the small print are deep in the small print for a reason.

The policy was huge, and started off by including every possible type of damage, then excluding every possible type of damage, then including the specifics covered.

We've gotten a LOT more savvy about insurance policies now. Our current homeowner's insurance policy does NOT have this rider. (And does have mold, fire, water, flood, hail, rain, earthquake, grass fire, and collision insurance. So yes, if we get hit by an uninsured, unlicensed, under-age driver who is speeding, high, drunk and infected with mold spores, the insurance on this house will pay off and only cost us a $250 deductible.)

[troubleinwinter]

7. Ugh. This means I will have to actually READ my entire policy.

I am sooooo glad it finally worked out satisfactorily for you! It had to have been hell these many months.

That three month exclusion is just abominable, and would lead to financial ruin for policy holders. It SHOULD be illegal!

[Warpy]

9. That's why they PAID

They must have had some 20 something Repuglican who read the whole thing wrong. It's the first 90 days after the policy is written, not the first 90 days of every calendar year.

Repuglicans are always looking for ways to welch on a bet.

[politicat]

10. Uh, no.

I actually can read quite well something, and I was never a 20-something Republican.

The actual policy that we received every year with the renewal (and I have all 9 of them) states that we could not have a claim from X date (date policy issued) to X+90 days date.

It'd likely that someone did read it wrong at some point in the past, but the policies are very clear.

As to why Mr. P and his ex kept USING that insurance... don't ask me. It was that way when I got here, and I just work here.

[Warpy]

11. Some repug rewrote that fine print, then

because it's supposed to be after the original policy issue date, not every year's renewal date.

That company just realized it was an untenable position, that if you took them to court over it, you'd not only get publicity for that piece of garbage and lose them a lot of customers, you'd probably inspire legislation to tighten up a few industry standards along the way. You were more potential trouble than your house was worth.

However, I wonder how many people on the Gulf Coast had that particular fine print on their policies and a midsummer policy renewal date. It could explain why so many have had insurance companies turn their claims down flat when the damage was obviously from wind and not from flooding.

[politicat]

12. Exactly.

And such print is going to show up on smaller policies more often than on larger ones. Company 1 (the old house, that just paid) had us for 9 years, and the mortgage wasn't big. (Small, 15 year old mobile home - hubby's old house.) My house is a house, the policy is much larger, covers more, and is less likely to be damaged by water, wind or fire just by being on a foundation.

I'd bet that at least half of the mobile homes in the Gulf Coast that were damaged had this kind of policy on it -- there aren't a lot of Mobile home insurers out there, and very few who will insure anything over 10 years old. And if they can get away with it, the insurance companies will. Their bets are ALWAYS fixed to benefit themselves. (Says she who is married to he who works for a major insurance underwriter....)