WallBuilder Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I remember seeing a news article about the costs of repairing a flood damaged house, the camera's took a tour of one such house showing the floorboards had been removed, the walls were back to bare brick and the heaters had been going full blast to dry it out. This house was also being refurbished and the network of new wires still being installed below the floor was noticable. I thought to myself why on earth when the repairs are so extensive are they not thinking ahead and so doing things to limit the damage if the house floods again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichJay Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I don't know where you found this load of rubbish because it is utter nonsense. But I await your lnk with interest.. For several years there has been an agreement between government and insurance companies about providing flood insurance for properties liable to flooding. It came about because planning for many houses had been given in at risk areas. This agreement has a year to run and the current government is in talks with insurers about how to extend the scheme. Here is my link to the DEFRA site which proves you are talking nonsense. http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13684-flood-risk-insurance.pdf One of the things being negotiated between insurers and the government is a levy on households at low risk. http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/11/22/uk-insurance-flood-idUKBRE8AL0SC20121122 Under Flood Re, drawn up by the insurance industry, households at low risk would pay a levy of up to 20 pounds a year into a fund which would cover claims from high-risk homes. The taxpayer would act as insurer of last resort in the event of an extreme flood that exhausted the capacity of the fund. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Also see http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9371621#post9371621 [another thread on same topic but more generally]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davyboy Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 One of the things being negotiated between insurers and the government is a levy on households at low risk. http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/11/22/uk-insurance-flood-idUKBRE8AL0SC20121122 If you don't insure your house you won't have to pay into the scheme .........Simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxy lady Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 One of the things being negotiated between insurers and the government is a levy on households at low risk. http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/11/22/uk-insurance-flood-idUKBRE8AL0SC20121122 I'm fully aware of that. But that's not what the OP is claiming. The OP is a total fabrication Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 If you have car insurance you are already paying extra to cover claims caused by people who have no insurance.Perhaps the same for buildings and contents cover ? It's slightly different in that with motor insurance it's not the non paying driver who will benefit but his "victim"...with house insurance it'd be the non paying householder who would benefit.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 All insurance is a waste of money: until you need to claim (and then the insurance is crucial). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANGELFIRE1 Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Just slightly off post here. If we have to build on "flood plains" is it beyond the wit of man to build the house on a raised platform of some kind. So when the flood plain gets flooded, the houses are above the water. Sounds simple enough. Angel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Better: don't build on flood plains- they're called that for a very good reason; can you guess what it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lil-minx92 Posted November 27, 2012 Author Share Posted November 27, 2012 I'm fully aware of that. But that's not what the OP is claiming. The OP is a total fabrication How so? The tax was as good as agreed. The govt and Insurers just fell out over who would swallow any extra losses- the people again or the Insurers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.