Insurance Information

[MeLLE159]

I just discovered this particular folder on the site so I figured I would share some information.
There are a few different ways to obtain Insurance which are: direct with the company, exclusive agent who lives in your same area but only writes for that insurance company, or an Independent agent: who works for multiple companies but also works in your area.
Foremost Insurance is a specialty lines company who deal with hard to placed homeowners, vacant homes, they also do a lot more.
I just want people to realize what they have for a homeowners policy.
Please check your policy no matter who your insured with. Make sure you know what you have. As a licensed agent I realize my customers is why I'm in business so just read your policy.
Also i know we get calls about insuring homes that are in foreclosure an we don't do it,so if an independent agent tells you they can get you a policy thru Foremost on a foreclosed home make sure he/she is correct. Also because Foremost is a specialty lines company on some of the homeowners or vacant policies offer basic coverage w/o cov for theft or vandalism. You have to pay extra for that.
So please to everyone here who has and homeowners or vacant policy through any company please read your policy to make sure your covered correctly for the use of the home.

[tobee43]

MeLLe...i know that this subject has been a contention for many people.

in the state we own our property, which is not where i live presently, we contacted our insurance company immediately upon vacating and and further advised them of the foreclosure. they were extremely clear to us, the rep explained no company will cover your property in that state. our payments for our insurance were paid via an escrow account.

we were also advised by our insurance co. they not only cannot any longer cover the house, but no one will provide coverage in that particular state, it is written into the actual mortgage, the bank who foreclosed on our house has a blanket coverage via the bank which covers the property once they took it over. (our locks were changed within one week and a notice put up by the bank in reference to their possession.)

while it's been a source of great debate who is liable if some one was to get insured while the property was in the foreclosure process, since until the actual sheriff's sale of the bank agrees to a deed in lieu, the deed still in the owners name, it was with all legal intent that the bank took over the house by not only placing written notice, but by changing all locks etc.,regained insurance coverage, and one's property was also surrendered while filing and discharged, that the owner would no longer be liable for any situation with respect to "insurance' related matters. (whether personal liability or damages to the home). this may NOT be the case in all states.

i have also read on this forum, that some people have indeed gotten insurance?? i found it odd that an insurance company would take such a risk, and yet, i also understand those that are squatting in the homes until they actually receive the NOD's; also want their possessions covered. i have even some of the mods advise the OP's to retain coverage, which is somewhat difficult when one's state does not allow independent insurance companies to provide such coverage.

[MSbklawyer]

That's good advice, to know what your homeowner's insurance policy covers and doesn't cover. But I seriously doubt that most people will be able to get such an understanding simply by reading their policies; anymore than they could answer their questions about bankruptcy by reading the code. It's not that they lack the intelligence or the ability to read the words, but neither is written in ordinary language or in such a way that lends itself to being understood by simply picking it up and reading it front to back. There was a semester-long class when I was in law school that dealt almost exclusively with the interpretation of insurance policy language and how courts, reading the exact same policy language, have reached completely opposite results regarding the language's meaning.

If you have a doubt about something that your insurance policy covers, ask your agent and have him give you his response in writing. Then ask followup questions -- because they'll never give you a straight answer the first time you ask -- and get those responses in writing too. Then put all this material in fireproof / waterproof box or a safety deposit box at a bank. Because if you don't have it in writing, they never said it.

[tobee43]

MSbklawyer, good advise...however, as you pointed out, it is most difficult to understand much of the legalese on both your insurance policies and or your mortgages.

also, providing you haven't been indulging this morning, LOL!!!! i would appreciate your opinion with respect to owners (on the property), liability aspect....once the bank has taken over the property yet the deed being still in the owners name until the foreclosure process has been completed (which could take years), and the deed actually being changed over in name.

the bank has a sign..."bank owned" maintains the property, has it insured with the banks blanket policy; so whom is the responsible party if someone were to get injured during the time the bank was "holding" the property until sheriff's sale???...(i'm speaking about properties that cannot transfer via deeds of lieu due to the fact they were and are government backed loans and need to go thru the process to allow the bank to collect from fha).

[MSbklawyer]

There would be a lot of factors that went in to answering such a liability question: What caused the injury?; Was it a hazardous condition of the property?; Did the foreclosing bank know or have reason to know of the hazardous condition?; Did the owner have reason to know of the hazardous condition?; Who caused the hazardous condition?; Did the person injured know of the hazardous condition?; Who (if anyone) gave the injured person permission to come onto the property?

For instance, if a prospective buyer comes onto the property with the owner's and the bank's permission and gets struck by lightning while examining the exterior, neither party is likely to be held liable. But if the prospective buyer steps in a hole in the yard that the bank put there while examining the water line, the bank would probably be held liable.

There's just too many unknown facts to give a straight-forward answer. But conceivably, either or both (or neither) could be liable for injuries that occur on the property depending on the facts of the situation.

[tobee43]

There would be a lot of factors that went in to answering such a liability question: What caused the injury?; Was it a hazardous condition of the property?; Did the foreclosing bank know or have reason to know of the hazardous condition?; Did the owner have reason to know of the hazardous condition?; Who caused the hazardous condition?; Did the person injured know of the hazardous condition?; Who (if anyone) gave the injured person permission to come onto the property?

For instance, if a prospective buyer comes onto the property with the owner's and the bank's permission and gets struck by lightning while examining the exterior, neither party is likely to be held liable. But if the prospective buyer steps in a hole in the yard that the bank put there while examining the water line, the bank would probably be held liable.

There's just too many unknown facts to give a straight-forward answer. But conceivably, either or both (or neither) could be liable for injuries that occur on the property depending on the facts of the situation.

thank you so much for at least some clarification on this never ending discussion line. i absolutely understand that there could be numerous variables that would have to be considered with respect to liability.

you made me more comfortable and even tho my atty claimed we were "safe"...we sent a certified letter to the bank with notification that if, they, their agents., etc. were to enter the property, it is to be at their own risk until they re-assign the deed. that...and a dime won't do us any good...other than it made ME feel better! LOL!!

[MeLLE159]

Liability is huge for insurance companies an the key with that is negligience. Which is why carriers ask so many questions upfront an do inspections on the home. My main point is for people who are going through foreclosure an may not be living in the home when its damaged. Because there technically still the owner of the home, but its been vacant for 30 days or more they may not have coverage for there damages. Yea the policies are hard to read but that's why you need to make sure you have and agent that isn't just trying to take your money, but really understand the policy your buying. I'm a licensed agent an its my job to know what's covered on my customers policy so I just want ppl to be aware of the exclusions on a policy. My best advice is read your policy and ask lots of questions!!

thank you so much for at least some clarification on this never ending discussion line. i absolutely understand that there could be numerous variables that would have to be considered with respect to liability.

you made me more comfortable and even tho my atty claimed we were "safe"...we sent a certified letter to the bank with notification that if, they, their agents., etc. were to enter the property, it is to be at their own risk until they re-assign the deed. that...and a dime won't do us any good...other than it made ME feel better! LOL!!

[tobee43]

Liability is huge for insurance companies an the key with that is negligience. Which is why carriers ask so many questions upfront an do inspections on the home. My main point is for people who are going through foreclosure an may not be living in the home when its damaged. Because there technically still the owner of the home, but its been vacant for 30 days or more they may not have coverage for there damages. Yea the policies are hard to read but that's why you need to make sure you have and agent that isn't just trying to take your money, but really understand the policy your buying. I'm a licensed agent an its my job to know what's covered on my customers policy so I just want ppl to be aware of the exclusions on a policy. My best advice is read your policy and ask lots of questions!!

we have none...we left the house 2 years ago...and it's still not foreclosed and although we surrendered it...our mortgage lender has it covered under their "blanket" policy....again, in the state we own the property, not a one company would cover any house vacated and in foreclosure...hence the mortgage clause from the lender...one would think.

[debee]

Always a good idea to have personal liability insurance until your name is off the title.

[MeLLE159]

Very true debee. I worked for one of the only companies that insure vacant homes and b/c of the risk there are so many things not covered on the policy. For example one of the major concerns with a vacant home is vandalism. If you want coverage for that you have to add it to the policy, an its not cheap depending on the value of the home. Or if you move out the home an its still your responsibility at the time and something happens to the home there is typically a denial of coverage b/c the company wasn't notified the home(risk) had changed. There is so much to understand about insurance that you should only insure one of your most important assets your home with someone you trust!

Always a good idea to have personal liability insurance until your name is off the title.

[goodyphilips]

Thats right, it is quite important to read your policy to ensure that all your holes are covered and you do not end up repenting when the calamity strikes. I think it is important to take advice of some some really good and experienced broker when you are going in for the very first time. It is not wise to deal with company directly because you can stay assured that they can always sweet talk to clinch a deal with you.

[Margaritodil]

The most important thing is that improve public understanding of insurance—what it does and how it works.

[tobee43]

The most important thing is that improve public understanding of insurance—what it does and how it works.

deb........COVER YOUR EYES!! ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Usually when someone stops paying their mortgage they also stop paying for insurance..." that's the REAL question here.

the banks have "mortgage impairment" insurance on foreclosed, and uninsured unforeclosed properties they own.



please site the law that requires such insurance to be maintain when the bank has possession of the premises...also the argument about the fact the bank has yet to allow the transfer of your name off the deed is not a legal winning legal augment if one have verified proof that the bank has taken full possession of the property.


"No law, but your mortgage requires you to insure the property. Usually when someone stops paying their mortgage they also stop paying for insurance. When this happens the insurance company will notify the lender if the policy is canceled. At this point, the lender will secure the insurance to protect their asset and add it to the amount you owe them."

while every insurance company and or agent that insures these properties thinks it a good idea to have personal liability insurance until your name is off the title, once the bank has taken possession provided you listed the foreclosure on the petition i'm still firm in believing it does not need to be done. why would anyone incur more costs...any liability would be directly at bank once they changed the locks and took over the property.

and, i'm going to stress this point once again, in the state we own our property it is simply NOT ALLOWED...NO ONE and i mean NO company will cover a home vacate and in foreclosure and that is because there is a clause in that's state mortgages agreements covering this exact situation. (the cost DOES get past on with the "fees and costs" associated with the foreclosure.) which usually drives people in to bk anyway.

while i have argued that it's just a technicality, once responded with cases are won on technicalities.......that's true and it works both ways.

i believe, like so many other companies looking to rip off customers in this terrible economy and take advantage in using scare tactics to manipulate those already going through the process of losing their homes and finding themselves on the streets.......right they are supposed pay some insurance company up to thousands...(here in florida some homeowners in hurricane areas cost thousands yearly to insure)....an insurance agents DREAM!!