Insurance giant State Farm says it will discontinue coverage for 72,000 houses and apartments in California starting this summer.

State Farm will discontinue coverage for 72,000 houses and apartments in California starting this summer, the insurance giant said this week, nine months after announcing it would not issue new home policies in the state

The Illinois-based company, California’s largest insurer, cited soaring costs, the increasing risk of catastrophes like wildfires and outdated regulations as reasons it won’t renew the policies on 30,000 houses and 42,000 apartments, the Bay Area News Group reported Thursday.

  • lennybird@lemmy.worldEnglish
    51·
    9 months ago

    I agree but I also think people who’ve lived there prior to this designation should be grandfathered in or compensated for uprooting and moving.

    There are millions of people in the country who through little fault of their own could be totally screwed by this.

    • PikaEnglish
      2·
      9 months ago

      I believe that if an insurance company /chooses/ to take on a insurance contract with a homeowner, they should be able to go through with it. So i fully agree with the grandfathered in thing, but like I also feel that a company shouldn’t be forced to keep a customer outside that contract expiring. If they are canceling the contract mid cycle I am 100% expecting compensation, but if its just a policy renewal? there’s other companies or if not that was a risk being built in a higher risk zone

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        5·
        9 months ago

        If they are canceling the contract mid cycle I am 100% expecting compensation, but if its just a policy renewal? there’s other companies or if not that was a risk being built in a higher risk zone

        These houses weren’t built when these zones were high risk and more companies are moving out, leaving people with nothing.

        Frankly, I feel no pity in forcing companies that have bent people over and fucked them to insure these places. Maybe that’ll teach them a lesson in not helping fight climate change as risk management

      • RecallMadness@lemmy.nz
        1·
        9 months ago

        Are US loans not given with the prerequisite that the property is insured? Wouldn’t pulling out unilaterally fuck everyone with a loan?

        • PikaEnglish
          1·
          9 months ago

          if it was allowed to withdraw prior to the loan being paid off yes, if they can’t secure another insurance anyway, but in my opinion that isn’t the insurance companies problem, they only provide their service, they are not involved with the financial issues of the broker/lender. It would fall on the consumer choosing to live in a potentially dangerous area to insure. That being said at least in this situation, the state has acknowledged that it’s an issue for homeleasers, and has given an alternative, but people dislike the cost of the insurance.