Earthquake cancellation notice from Billings Mutual Insurance in St.Charles Mo.

Here is a letter I recieved in the mail yesterday from my home onwers insurance company.

Why is my policy being amended to remove earthquake coverage ?

The peril of earthquake represents a potential catatrophic loss for our company and requires large amounts of additional coverage to be purched in the event an earthquake occurs. The market for this additional coverage has narrowed to the point we no longer able to purchase coverage at acceptable levels in pricing. With our current earthquake expiring on 12/31/2012 and no alternative solution, this left no option but to remove earthquake from our policy coverage.


They had no problem taking my money for the last 18 years..... Do they know somethging we dont ?

Who knows? They've made it very expensive, but since ironically, I don't live in an actual flood zone, I can't get Fema flood insurance. Yeah, nice.

I worked in the insurance world for 6 years (Underwritting). Typically they never remove coverages unless a particular peril has become a major problem for them. So its usually after a problem...not before.

I'd say they are thinking ahead, so where did they get the idea that there will be EQ troubles?

When insurance companies feel that an element of their policy presents extreme risk they go to what are known as re-insurers. Those are specific companies that provide them with backup insurance to save them harmless in case their is an event of that type. What they are saying here is that there seems to be a real lack of anybody who wishes to provide such backup at all but huge rates which they will not pay. Thus, they take themselves out of insuring against that hazzard.

Then what's the use in having insurance?

I saw on another thread a few weeks back that they have also made coverage for "Named Storms" a provision in insurance policies. That is why all storms are named now. If your policy states that you are not covered for "Named Storms" then if you get damage from wind, rain, snow or tornado due to the "named storm" you are on your own.

So are they going to lower your premium since they won't be providing earthquake coverage????

I saw on another thread a few weeks back that they have also made coverage for "Named Storms" a provision in insurance policies. That is why all storms are named now. If your policy states that you are not covered for "Named Storms" then if you get damage from wind, rain, snow or tornado due to the "named storm" you are on your own.

can anyone confirm if this is true?????
i knew there had to be a reasoning behind naming storms that was something about money. it's always about money.

people were saying it was for "ratings" on the weather channel but now this sheds a whole new light on it.

You have got to be kidding me.

PC, I'm glad you're back to your mustachioed villain avatar...always makes me smile! :)

You have got to be kidding me.

I worked in the insurance world for 6 years (Underwritting). Typically they never remove coverages unless a particular peril has become a major problem for them. So its usually after a problem...not before.

I'd say they are thinking ahead, so where did they get the idea that there will be EQ troubles?

when u talk to those guys, it's amazing at what is not covered....

no coverage for flood or water backup
no coverage for terrorism or any act of war
usually a limit of $200 for gold, silver and cash

and now they don't even want to cover earthquakes?

in florida... we pay extra for named storms....welcome to our world.

:38spec:

Then what's the use in having insurance?