Government Flood Assistance - What's Fair?

[RW99]

You can get earthquake coverage on the west coast. And if I'm not mistaken tsnunami would be treated like flooding.

[cal_guy]

Province will ban future development in floodways

Won’t pay for damages from future floods for homes rebuilt in floodways

http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...475/story.html

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by ken0042

The flip side to all of this is that the insurance industry does not cover damage caused by rivers flooding. Does it cover other natural disasters like a tsnunami, or earthquakes? It brings about the question of which is better; is it better for the gov't to bail out those affected? Or should the gov't force the insurance industry to start offering coverage? What would that do to our insurance rates?

Earthquake coverage can be bought on the West Coast as a rider, it is an exclusion in the wordings, however it is very costly and will only be getting worse. I would say in the next 5-10 years people on Vancouver Island and Vancouver area will be paying close to an average of $1000 extra for their insurance for earthquake. That's assuming the average home is around $500,000 which is not a stretch. Right now people are paying a little over half of that.

Also what most people don't realize, or don't want to hear, is that with earthquake coverage you are covered to your limit, not guaranteed replacement, so when prices sky rocket for trades, equipment, etc. when a disaster hits most people won't have the coverage needed and will either have a smaller home or have to wait to have their home rebuilt.

However if the government made insurance companies cover all risks then I believe that instead of the people with the risk paying it will be everyone paying. All of a sudden people in Calgary would have earthquake coverage.

[photon]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Province will ban future development in floodways

Won’t pay for damages from future floods for homes rebuilt in floodways

Kind of light on details.

The province will allow — and pay for — the repair and rebuilding of damaged homes in floodways but it will not pay for damages from future floods on rebuilt homes in those zones, he said. If a property owner chooses to relocate, the province will provide financial assistance.

So it says they'll pay for repair and rebuilding, but won't pay for damages from future floods on rebuilt homes, what about damages from future floods on repaired homes? Can someone choose to relocate even if their home was only repaired instead of needing to be rebuilt?

What does financial assistance mean for people who choose to relocate? If development is banned in those areas, and there's zero flood coverage available if one does rebuild in that area, the property value is going to plunge to a fraction of its former value. Does that mean the province will buy out their properties at market value before the flood?

What about condo owners? The condo board is repairing a property, can individual owners choose to relocate even if their property was on the Xth floor and wasn't directly impacted, but is impacted because they have to pay to have the rest of the building repaired, now not only are their property values going to plummet because development isn't allowed in the area, they are financially on the hook because there'll be no government assistance available going forward, will they even be able to take advantage of the relocation assistance?

Or could the board of an entire condo corp decide to relocate the entire condo, building a new one somewhere else?

Seems like a nightmare to me.