A homeowners insurance policy is a written contract.
Shouldn't something like this, be spelled out somewhere in a contract.
Which is why it sounds like they are now on a path to minimize the risk of that happening. They won’t go apter the property owner who screwed up, but they can and will go after a general contractor who screwed up.
If construction starts in June, why are you calling in March for insurance on a completed house?
We use State Farm on one property and Farm Family on the other. Both excellent to deal with. Seems like one or the other could deal with this.I am in the late planning stages of building a new 32x40 shop building and house on 30 rural acres. Since I had a homeowners policy payment due on my current home I thought I would call my agent and get a quote to start the process.I gave her dimension,cost,estimated value,ect. and the fact that I would be GC'ing the project with 4 subs.Same thing I did when I built my present house.Keep in mind that I have had the same agent since I got my first car 48 years ago and the same carrier on my house for 17 years.She got back to me a couple of days later and informed me if I GC'ed or built the building myself none of the carriers they deal with (which is all of the ones operating in the state of Maine) would insure it even after an inspection upon completion.I was SHOCKED. She told me about another customer that replaced the siding on his house himself and when the insurance carrier found out they immediately canceled the policy. I am going to get around this problem by hiring my site contractor as the GC on paper, but I will still do the coordinating, ordering and scheduling. This is all despite the fact that there is no general contractor or builder licensing of any kind in Maine. Insurance companies are the WORST greedy, scummy bas#ards ever!
Has anyone else run into this farce...I suspect it is a very recent thing.
My garage is not yet complete. My insurance company is insuring the building under my normal homeowner's policy. I was very clear to the agent that the building is not yet complete. Right now, the siding and electrical are the only things not complete. The siding starts tomorrow. Electrical will get done as soon as the ground is thawed enough to dig a six foot long trench over to my other garage.
That makes sense if there wasn't the obvious paradox in the actual data. I would argue that of all the collapsed buildings we could find on the news, none of them are DIY built. I don't mean few, I mean none. The company should have some loss data. Would be interesting to me at least to know the facts. I would have assumed that there simply isn't any protection to be had. If my shop falls, I guess I'll let y'all know.
I did not say it was a house in post #1. I am just getting my ducks all in a row. Found out my agent does not write with State Farm so that will be an avenue to explore.I have MMG right now and they are getting very picky and pricey. Agent explained that the reason is due to the fact that you can't sue yourself in case of defective construction such as in a roof collapse from snow and ice. I would say this is just an excuse from the insurance co., but whatever.Part of the problem is that there is no existing house or homeowners policy to base this off of.
Collapsed pole barns that failed under snow loads aren’t an uncommon sight in Northern Wisconsin and the UP.
I would assume that "not built to snow load code" would be a valid exclusion on a claim in this situation.
You’re totally correct.
In Texas, I would start with Farm Bureau and Germania. I'm sure you have similar up there that do farm and fishing structures.
I think I just went through a similar situation to the OP's. I had Allstate and it was great as long as my property was vacant but as soon as I put a structure on it they would no longer cover the property under my policy. The agent didn't seem willing to do any more research on the matter. It was a nightmare (for my wife) to find an insurance company that would insure a structure on a property that wasn't a residence. She eventually found an agent at Farmers who worked with a 3rd party to get the coverage we wanted.
Google the Korean Shed of Doom in British Columbia....
"rights to protect their assests"? Perhaps I misunderstand, but the "asset" is not owned by the insurance company. The only asset to them is the likelyhood of not having to pay out more than they have collected, Yes, if the insured property suffers a claim that is more than the policy is worth, that is their mistake and misfortune. Which does happen, but yet most insurance companies survive and thrive, making profits, not being the benevolent caretakers they portray themselves to be.
The insurance company’s assets in this case that they have invested as collateral to pay off the cost to repair or replace the property owner’ building in the event of a loss.
I think I'd believe that more if every insurance company headquarters were asture simple strutures. But nearly all that I've seen are large, opulent, campuses. Like Acuity just north of Sheboygan WI. Its impressive I'll say that. From I-43 it looks like a cross between a huge mega-church and a premier college campus. A soaring central cathedral like section, makes me wonder how that is not made from profits.
iltla.com
Not sure when it became a bad thing for companies to make a profit. According to link you posted, which presumably is industry wide, the industry actually lost money through underwriting and all of the "profits" were generated via investment income on its reserves, which are largely held to pay future claims. Underwriting loss means their core business, writing policies and paying claims, is not priced adequately to support future operations. Insurance is cyclical, there are good years without significant catastrophes, and bad years. Insurance companies won't stay in business over the long haul if they price risks below what it costs in claims eventually it all comes out in the wash.Insurance Industry is Quietly Making Record Profits
Highlights\n\n\n\tThe p/c insurance industry made a record $88 billion in
I suspect that it is all about subrogation. When insurance pays out on a claim they want to be able to recover what they paid out if at all possible. They can’t subrogate back against their own policy holder. But if the OP’s building collapses they may have a subrogation claim against the OP’s contractor. For example if the contractor does not put on hurricane clips and the roof blows off the OP‘s insurance company will pay the OP and then may try and recover from the OP’s contractor.
Not sure if you're aware or not but insurance is Highly regulated. Most companies can't just charge whatever they want their rates have to be approved based upon historical experience, among others, by state regulators, who often are unwilling to approve requested rate increases for a variety of reasons, most of which can't be discussed here. This is especially true with personal lines. Moreover, if regulators refuse to approve adequate rates many company's are forced to continue insuring unprofitable business, so we often hear about companies refusing to write new policies in certain locations or lines of business. It's one way for insurers to manage their risk exposure. You may have been caught up in that. Looks like industry generated about 12% overall. I'm guessing that's no more than 5% if calculated on invested assets rather than premiums earned because insurers are also heavily restricted in the types of investments they are able to make. Either way, record profits or not, premiums are still priced in adequately if they are losing money on underwriting. I happen to have alot of experience with this particular issue. Anyway I'm done good luck with your project.
Facts? We don't need no stinkin' facts!