Mold

mary · Post by **mary** » Mon Jul 08, 2002 9:06 pm

Yes, I believe that everyone is overreacting to the mold issue.<P>Mold has been around longer than man and will be here when we are all gone. Man and mold can live together. Fast and easy money has always been a draw for some people.<P>I talked to a company that removes mold from houses. They go into these places in special suits and masks because it is so toxic. I asked them how they were required to dispose of this toxic waste and their reply was that they dump it in the land fills.<P>You tell me if people are overreacting.

Amy · Post by **Amy** » Mon Jul 08, 2002 9:28 pm

I agree with Mary - we think it is the asbestos of the 2000's! Between attorneys and contractors that look to make a fast buck, it has been blown way out of proportion.

Suzie · Post by **Suzie** » Mon Jul 08, 2002 9:40 pm

Do You think the industry is overreacting to the mold issue in either Texas or California?

tsorrels · Post by **tsorrels** » Tue Jul 09, 2002 9:01 pm

This is just another case for the plaintiff attorneys to make money off of the insurance carriers. Since when did a homeowner's policy become a maintenance policy? In the majority of cases, mold stems from poor maintenance. I grew up in SE Texas (West Orange) and it was SO wet that you could dig a shovel into the ground, turn over ONE blade, and watch the water fill up in the hole. We had crawfish mounds in our backyard BEFORE it was cool to EAT them....and we used to put carbide in the holes and I guess we polluted the ground water table....so, all of you "tree huggers" GET OVER IT! I already have. I feel this is just another cycle. When the courts tighten up (or the legislature act), then things will settle back down and we can all get on with our lives.

Jeff Gearhart · Post by **Jeff Gearhart** » Tue Jul 09, 2002 9:39 pm

The problem with mold is the inability to scientifically set standards as to the levels that are hazardous to humans. Secondly, with water damage claims, which mold can ensue within 24-48 hours, dominating homeowners and habitational risks, the attorneys have found another "golden egg" to pursue, which is causing insurers to constrict or stop the writing of these risks entirely. This will stop with the new fungi/mold exclusions.

bumpiee · Post by **bumpiee** » Wed Jul 10, 2002 11:08 am

Mold is an old problem just coming into the forefront of insurance issues. I have been in this business for forty years and have seen many issues like this come up. And the industry reaction is always the same....run for the hills. If this is a new "risk" outside the current rating structure, rather than run, view this as an opportunity for more premium dollars. Add a coverage endorsement and charge for it. Ultimately that's what happens anyway. Look at flood, pollution, earthquake and etc. But don't just strip it from coverage and leave the insuring public out in the cold. It's an opportunity, not a liability.

barbara · Post by **barbara** » Wed Jul 10, 2002 12:13 pm

Blown out of proportion? That's a huge understatement. I don't know which group is guiltiest of fanning the "mold crisis" flames -- attorneys, politicians, disreputable contractors or the media. And I doubt the new Tx forms will make much difference. Insureds will be claiming their mold loss under their prior "all risk" policy, saying they just discovered this "old" loss. The language has not yet been tested in court; and there's always a loophole. The policy was never intended as a maintenance policy but that's what the courts & radical consumer activists are demanding. And I completely disagree with Bumpiee; you can't charge enough for mold coverage! To my knowledge, the avg insured can't cause flood, EQ, pollution or windstorm, but crooked contractors have already been caught who were "cooking" mold in houses by stapling wet blankets to the walls, turning off the a/c, etc. This is a trend completely based upon dishonesty & greed and the average Joe shouldn't have to pay for funding a mold pool for these lower-than-pond slime conspirators. I say we shoot 'em.