OK; your house got badly flooded...

Sep 24, 2005 27 Replies

| | "Dave Fawthrop" wrote in | message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com... | > On 24 Sep 2005 23:17:49 -0700, "Weatherlawyer" | > | > wrote: | >

| > | | > | Dave Fawthrop wrote: | > | | > | | > | | > | I am glad you can smirk. It takes some doing with a trace | > of humanity | > | these days. I'm not saying you have a trace of humanity of | > course. Just | > | that I am glad you are not dead. | > | | > | I am not lying and I am not smirking. | > | | > | Now f*ck off. Go and waste it elsewhere. | >

| > Merely suggesting that anyone living on a flood plain should | > move to | > somewhere higher. | | | some people are dirt poor and need to live near their low rent | jobs ... below sea level in the ghetto is cheapest...and all | the relatives are there too....so there you have it.

As the Insurance companies ratchet up insurance cost, living on flood plains will become too expensive for the dirt poor.

When I was tenting I always tried to pitch on a six inch high hill to keep out of the puddles and boggy bits. One night it threw it down and there was a lot of noise outside. I checked that the tent was dry, and went back to sleep. In the morning we were on an island and all the tents around us had gone, flooded out.

If you had even the small amount of foresight required to keep a piece of styrofoam board for an eventual emergency, chances are you wouldn't be living there in the first place.

Having worked in ghettos, I can tell you that 99.9% of the residents are not capable of planning anything beyond the next few hours and that's one of the main reasons they are there in the first place.

Standard US house insurance specifically excludes flood damage. Seperate, expensive, Federal flood insurance is available. But - many people don't actually read the fine print in their policy, and have no idea that they aren't covered.

Sheila

So the small print says it specifically excludes flooding by dihydrogen monoxide?

| Dave Fawthrop wrote: | > | > As the Insurance companies ratchet up insurance cost, living on flood | > plains will become too expensive for the dirt poor. | > | Standard US house insurance specifically excludes flood damage. Seperate, | expensive, Federal flood insurance is available. But - many people don't | actually read the fine print in their policy, and have no idea that they | aren't covered.

We are posting to uk.d-i-y. Why do you give US examples which are by definition irrelevant here?

It started as a crosspost to alt.building.construction - as the legalities and construction methods vary greatly between UK and US it looked a bit trollish to me.

Yes - the original post specifically referred to FEMA, and the recent floods in the US.

Sheila

| Rob Morley wrote: | > | > In article , | > snipped-for-privacy@hyphenologist.co.uk.invalid says... | > > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:35:24 -0400, S Viemeister | > > wrote: | > >

| > > | Dave Fawthrop wrote: | > > | >

| > > | > As the Insurance companies ratchet up insurance cost, living on flood | > > | > plains will become too expensive for the dirt poor. | > > | >

| > > | Standard US house insurance specifically excludes flood damage. Seperate, | > > | expensive, Federal flood insurance is available. But - many people don't | > > | actually read the fine print in their policy, and have no idea that they | > > | aren't covered. | > >

| > > We are posting to uk.d-i-y. | > > Why do you give US examples which are by definition irrelevant here? | > >

| > >

| > It started as a crosspost to alt.building.construction - as the | > legalities and construction methods vary greatly between UK and US it | > looked a bit trollish to me. | | Yes - the original post specifically referred to FEMA, and the recent | floods in the US.

So the whole thread was Off Topic, and I did not notice :-(

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required