Flood Insurance Policies Suspended

[preciousdove]

http://www.kbtv4.tv/news/default.asp?mode=shownews&id=9835

KBTV-4 News has learned the National Flood Insurance Program has temporarily suspended all claim requests. FEMA officials tell us this is because the program is nearing its borrowing limit.

Currently, the program has a $3.5 billion borrowing limit. They are requesting an additional $5 Billion.

FEMA says this request has passed a US House vote and they are currently awaiting senate approval. They say this request is due to the largest insurance payout in our nation’s history from hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Local insurance agencies are urging those with national flood insurance policies to contact their senator.

[acmejack]

1. Five billion more from food stamps?

Or perhaps From benefits for the wounded veterans?

[yankeeinlouisiana]

2. No, they need to get rid of

the tax cuts.

[newscott]

3. Must be related to all those frivolous lawsuits people file too.

I'm sure the insurance industry will have some legislation that will require them not to pay out on any claim of any kind by end of next year, no?

[jody]

4. Biggest beneficiaries are wealthy owners of retreats in flood prone areas.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[harlinchi]

11. I posted once about lower cost insurance for lower risk areas...

...and you, along with another from the area who responded, have made me rethink and almost regret those words. I'm from a different part of the country and I hope now to have a more open mind. I hope you and yours are OK.

[jody]

18. I guess we disagree. Have a nice day. n/t

[wakeme2008]

5. It is my understanding that this is a Federal program that

people pay into. Question is what did they do with the money in the "good" years.... My guess they spent it.

[pitohui]

8. there are never any good yrs w. flooding

this is why there is no profit in it and why it has to be federally funded

yes, we pay to participate

many of us were told that, living in Zone C -- "No Flood Zone, Outside the Flood Plain" -- it would be fraud to sell us flood insurance, because we were not at risk of flooding

i bought it anyway, but many people who took the advice of the experts are screwed

and now it sounds like even the people who did buy it, are not getting paid

i can't think of anyone i know offhand who has already received their flood settlement altho one of my friends was supposed to get it this week, she lost EVERYTHING

this is terrible, truly terrible

i don't care if the feds have to get out a printing press and PRINT the damn money, they need to get these people their damn money, this is not welfare, this insurance you buy

[spotbird]

6. My God, there is no trust left in government!

No phase out, no responsibility, nada,

[chat_noir]

9. required by mortgagors

I owned a house in a 100 year flood plain, and my mortgagor required my to carry flood insurance. The premiums were included in my morgage payments. Escrowed like home insurance and property taxes.

After the Army Corps of Engineers widened and deepened the creek, and it was thus changed to a 500 year flood plain, my mortgagor dropped the requirement.

In 15 years, the creek overflow never came close to my house, thank goodness.

[pitohui]

10. depends on the flood plain maps, which are apparently wrong

my mortgager told me that my neighborhood was at zero risk of flooding and while i'd admit, no, my house hasn't flooded, my damage has been wind, the houses on either side of me have flooded as have any number of other houses just on my street so i wonder about these flood plain maps, i think they are often years or decades out of date

fema has already acknowledged the flood plain maps in mississippi were wrong and they are releasing the new maps early so that people will not rebuild w.out the correct information, a lot of people who didn't have the flood insurance were wiped out and if they rebuild will actually have to elevate their new homes

mortgage lenders aren't engineers or meteorologists, i'll never trust the word of a banker again abt whether or not my neighborhood might flood

[Strelnikov_]

14. You Have The Right Idea RE Purchasing Flood Insurance

even if you are outside the 100 yr. inundation.

The development of detailed FIS (Flood Insurance Studies) are performed with the intent of establishing regulatory floodways and approximate Base Flood (100 yr.) elevations (BFE's) and inundation limits. As such, inaccuracies are inherent.

Over the years I have experienced the following sources of errors:

1) Hydrology. Generally, my experience has been that the FIS over-estimates discharges (flood flows) in the event of a discrepancy. Under-estimation of the Base Flood (100 yr.) discharge would probably be minor.

2) Hydraulics. The models generally use a somewhat limited number of sections, but in my experience I have generally been within a foot of the FIS BFE with the corrected-effective (more accurate) model I developed to perform a more detailed analysis.

3) Mapped inundation limits inaccurate. This is generally the problem. Topography collected during mapping is somewhat limited. A 5 foot 'valley' or 'swale' can make a big difference in the inundation limit extents in a flood plain. I worked with the FIS in one community where the map did not disclose the fact that most of the industrial park was in the 100 yr. floodplain, with one factory that would have 4 ft. of inundation on the main floor.

The maps should be used as a guide. If your property is in the vicinity (laterally and vertically) of the 500 yr. inundation limits, consult an Engineer or floodplain administrator.

As a aside, there was an article in the St. Louis paper a month ago about how land owners in the Missouri River floodplain want to have the NFIP maps revised since they are no longer in the 100 yr. floodplain due to a new levee system designed for the 500 yr. event.

Perfectly valid, standard procedure. Thing is, 500 yr. means you have a 1/500 chance of being wiped out any given year. If only the lottery had these odds.

[lumpy]

12. This discussion is enlightening

and informative. Damn, is there anything that hasn't been fouled up since Bush got into office. The American people are getting scewed in every area. Anyway thanks for your posts and the best of luck to all.

[Xithras]

13. FFI needs to be eliminated.

Let's try "land relocation insurance". If your house floods, the gov will pay you the insured value and claim your flooded property. You can then buy a new house elsewhere with it, with a few stipulations preventing you from buying in any flood plain.

Three things will happen. First, people will move out of the flood plains when their houses flood (Good Thing). Second, flood plains will become open areas again, fixing all kinds of environmental problems along the rivers and coasts (again, Good Thing). Third, the people who refuse to move after a flood will be forced to rebuild on their own dollar, and no longer burden the rest of the nation because of their stubbornness (yet another Good Thing).

FFI should not be a subsidy to allow people to build and live in ecologically damaging and dangerous areas. It should simply be a recovery tool to help people displaced by floods get back on their feet.

[Strelnikov_]

16. This Is Pretty Much How It Works

If the damage (payout) is extensive enough, my understanding is they require relocation (out of floodplain) or flood proofing (elevating the structure or modifying the structure, such as filling the basement and moving HVAC etc. above BFE).

That's how it worked here in the midwest after the '93 floods.

[lumpy]

17. Makes sense.

Interesting.

[Endangered Specie]

15. Just in time for thanksgiving...

:sarcasm:

[xchrom]

19. another day in bushistan.

[jody]

20. Does NFIP cover NOLA non-residential property owners who own rental houses

in flood prone areas?

National Flood Insurance Program says “As a homeowner, you can insure your home up to $250,000 and its contents up to $100,000. If you're a renter, you can cover your belongings up to $100,000. As a non-residential property owner, you can insure your building and its contents up to $500,000.”

If so, why are “residential property owners” at $250k not treated the same as “non-residential property owners” at $500k?