Southeast News
Viewing comments for:
Miss. Judge Rules Some State Farm Policy Exclusions Unenforceable
Southeast News • May 26, 2006
Provisions in a State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. policy that exclude certain damage from Hurricane Katrina are unenforceable, a federal judge in Gulfport, Miss. has ruled.
A couple whose Long Beach ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
| Subject | Posted By | Posted On |
|---|---|---|
| RE: RE: Rulings - doncha know | Dana Fairfax | Jun 23, 2006, 4:21 pm |
| RE: Rulings - doncha know | ClaimHawk | Jun 1, 2006, 12:04 am |
| RE: RE: Rulings - Gordon Keller | doncha know? | May 31, 2006, 10:25 pm |
| RE: Rulings - Gordon Keller | ClaimHawk | May 31, 2006, 6:36 pm |
| Rulings | Gordon Keller | May 31, 2006, 4:27 pm |
| RE: RE: What Came First - Wind or Water Damage? Nature Says. | drudy | May 30, 2006, 3:29 pm |
| RE: What Came First - Wind or Water Damage? Nature Says... | Love Lawyers | May 30, 2006, 2:24 pm |
| Wind Driven rain | C Johnson | May 30, 2006, 1:28 pm |
| What Came First - Wind or Water Damage? Nature Says... | Roger Poe | May 28, 2006, 9:40 am |
| Back to article | ||
Subject: What Came First - Wind or Water Damage? Nature Says...
Assumed damage.
Can the sum of structural components, which all together make up the whole,(externally and internally), of a given material used/code enforced type, age and geographically placed structure, be 'assumed to be damaged' after a natural "event"?
Like the 'if a tree falls down in a forest, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound as it falls and hits the ground' kind of logic, can damage of different flavors be assumed in physically similar [wind/hail] storm events, down to a given zip code?
www.cis.fiu.edu/hurricaneloss/html/model001.html
www.house.gov/science/hearings/research04/mar24/sciaudone.pdf
Assuming (roofing, structural racking, structural balloning, saltwater intrusion in wind generated openings, corrosion, debris hits, debris contamination, etc.) common damage BEFORE an event, then verifying, in person, if those assumptions are relevant (EXTERNALLY & INTERNALLY) to a given structure AFTER an event, (even if a structure was flooded by rising water, or by direct or muted tidal surge pressures), seems like one fair approach to remove doubt about who-owes-for-what liability issues.
Google search the following;
The Saffir-Simpson wind/damage scale.
The Fujita wind/damage scale.
rogerpoegc@yahoo.com