Posted On: December 19, 2006, 6:52 am CST

Posted By: William

The flood exclusion has not and is not likely to be negated. Judge Senter has been pretty clear about that. But neither can they simply lay off all damages as surge/flood. What is probably on the table is what came first wind or surge and to what degrees they damaged some homes. In my personal case I made a successful claim of substantial damage hours before the surge arrived. Did I receive full compensation for my structure and contents...NO>..and I shouldnt have. But I did recover what was a comenserate amount based on what we could prove.

My point here is that State Farm, and others are simply cherry picking. They want the easy risk business but dont want the business with more risk. I am of the belief that companies if they choose to do business in a state should be obligated to write business throughout the state.

As to the criminal misconduct possibly of State Farm in falsifying engineering reports, that is yet to go to court but I suspect some SF heads are going to roll over this.