Posted On: August 16, 2006, 1:36 pm CDT

Posted By: Mark H

The point of the judge's ruling is that flood damage is not covered under the homeowner's policy, and that the agent did not tell Mr. Leonard otherwise. This means that the burden of obtaining proper coverages lies with the homeowner.

What puzzles me is that Mr. Leonard and others on the Gulf Coast didn't feel the need to buy flood insurance when just one year earlier Hurricane Ivan struck Gulf Shores, Alabama with massive damage from storm surge. This was only 90 miles east of Pascagoula, Mississippi.

Mr. Leonard should have gone back to his agent and asked "Why did you say I didn't need flood insurance; because I'm hearing news from Gulf Shores, and the insurance companies are not paying for flood damage under the homeowner's policies?" If the agent's response is simply "You don't need it.", the homeowner should say "Why not? Will my homeowner's policy cover flood damage? My house is 500 feet from the gulf and I want coverage for flood damage. Sell it to me."

But apparently that didn't happen, and now it's the big, bad insurance company's fault.

As for the lawyers, screw them all and the insureds they ride in on!!!