More on the Cincinnati earthquake: If you want homeowners' coverage for one, you can't get it
May 9, 2008 01:32 PM
Well I never thought this would be an issue. Just got the quote back from the insurance man for homeowners' coverage on the new house (yes, we're finally moving, no I haven't blogged about it. Not enough hours in the day). He gave me two quotes. One for earthquake coverage, one without. An explanatory note says the insurance company has suspended its agents' binding authority for earthquake coverage "until further notice." So if I opt for earthquake coverage, they'll add it to the policy, if and when they are allowed to cover earthquakes again.
This is Ohio! Talk about something that makes you think that "they" know something we don't. The Big One is just around the corner and the only people who know it is Big Insurance!
I say that in jest, of course. Kind of. It's been so long since I've blogged, my readers (if there are any left) may not know my sense of humor.
But anyway: If they are allowed to write coverage for earthquakes again, it will cost me $250 per year. For something that supposedly is really, really unlikely. Is $250 for earthquake coverage--in Ohio--a rip off? The house is brick, so any damage would be really expensive to fix. But what are the chances?
UPDATE: I asked the agent about it, and he said that within an hour of the earthquake, he'd gotten an email informing him that he no longer had binding authority for earthquake coverage. And, he says coverage is going to be getting a lot more expensive, not less. But for $250 per year in earthquake coverage, I'd like to at least be within a 10 hour drive of a palm tree.