Having trouble finding inexpensive home insurance since you live in a fire-prone area? A brand new proposal from state regulators could soon make it much easier to get insurance. But consumer advocates worry it might also mean steep premium increases for a lot of Californians.
This week, California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara provided more details of his plan to stabilize the state's faltering home insurance market. In exchange for allowing insurers to boost their premiums as a consequence of the growing threat of climate change — a long-standing industry demand — the businesses would comply with expand coverage in parts of the state where wildfire risk is biggest.
These areas would come with much of the north and central coast, the Sierra Nevada and most of Northern California. In the Bay Area, insurers would must issue more policies in Marin, Napa and Santa Cruz counties, in addition to parts of San Mateo and Sonoma counties and a small portion of Santa Clara County.
In addition, insurers would must offer latest policies for fire-prone homes in additional urban areas comparable to Oakland Hills and Los Gatos.
“We are tackling this insurance availability crisis head-on,” Lara said in a press release.
In recent years, insurers have stripped tons of of 1000’s of policyholders of coverage in fire-prone areas like Wine Country and the Santa Cruz Mountains. Homeowners who couldn't find traditional policies needed to depend on the exorbitantly expensive FAIR Plan, the state's insurer of last resort.
Meanwhile, several of the biggest insurers, including State Farm and Allstate, have stopped issuing latest home insurance policies across California. That means less competition amongst insurers, which has likely contributed to recent price spikes.
Lara's plan goals to encourage insurers to insure more homes by allowing them to justify across-the-board premium increases with complex modeling programs that calculate future disaster risk. Currently, the state Department of Insurance requires insurers to set premiums based on historical losses, which the industry says has resulted in premiums in lots of areas which are too low to offset the risks of worsening fire seasons. All other states already allow insurers to make use of forward-looking “catastrophe models,” and lots of have higher premiums than California.
In return, insurers must make sure that a complete of 85% of households within the designated fire risk areas are insured.
The state chosen the areas by identifying fire-prone ZIP codes where greater than 15% of house owners policies were covered by the FAIR plan, in addition to ZIP codes where incomes are low and insurance premiums are high. It also identified counties where greater than 20% of policies are considered high risk as a consequence of fire danger.
Outside of those areas, insurance firms must also include many owners in additional urban areas currently included within the FAIR plan.
Seren Taylor, vp of the Personal Insurance Federation of California, an industry group, expects many insurers that negotiated much of the plan will comply with the deal. What is less clear, Taylor said, is whether or not State Farm, which has probably the most policies within the state, will write latest insurance because it already has such a big market share, about 20 percent.
“I would expect everyone else to be in a position to grow and benefit,” Taylor said.
Earlier this yr, State Farm said The company is working with regulators on the proposed regulation, but has no plans to resume drafting latest guidelines. It will “evaluate the need for further business actions as market conditions change,” it said.
Meanwhile, consumer advocates are vigorously opposing the proposed reforms. They argue that the appliance of catastrophic models through an opaque and potentially discriminatory process would result in unfair tariff increases.
They have also raised concerns that smaller insurers and latest players entering the market could possibly be exempt from some requirements. And they’ve suggested that the Insurance Department might not be able to implement the brand new insurance requirements after an initial two-year transition period.
“If after two years the insurance companies can say they cannot meet their targets, the Commissioner can simply move the goalposts,” Carmen Balber, executive director of Consumer Watchdog, said in a press release.
“We have strong enforcement tools under existing laws to hold insurance companies accountable, and that is what we will do,” said agency spokesman Michael Soller.
The ministry plans to carry a virtual workshop on June 26 to assemble public input on the proposal. The agency can have final say on the plan, which it hopes to approve by the top of the yr.
image credit : www.mercurynews.com