Posted On: August 15, 2006, 4:22 pm CDT

Posted By: tag

As an agent, it is imperative that you present your products to the clients and the clients makes their own deciscion as to whether or not to pay a premium for coverage. If you live in an area that is known for wind and flood water damage potential why would not purchase flood insurance? Knowing the premiums would not be cheap but the peace of mind would have been worth the few thousand that the premiums would have cost them.

Case in point, in southern California when they had the October fires 3,000 homes were lost. Many had shake/wood roofs. Many homes were under insured. Is it not the responsibility of the homeowner to review their policies annually and to guard against potential fire hazards, i.e. 30 year hold shake roofs? As an agent when speaking with clients and counseling them on premium increases due to increased coverage many customers elected not to have that increased coverage and increased premium. That is not the fault of the agent. It's a buyer caveat and should be weighed heavily when deciding to under-insure yourself. Kudos to the judge for standing by the contract.