A 76,000$ mortgage and you get $11,000 to pay it off.......

mominiowa · Post by **mominiowa** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 2:02 pm

Some of you will recall I talked about a mom and daughter here in our county that came from Loiusiana..She received word from FEMA yesterday that she will receive just $11,000 for her house to be rebuilt....Can you imagine? She has $76,000 left to pay on it - but because she built in a Parish that has limited income, but with cheap land and good neighbors- that is what they want her to settle on....What in the world will these people do...Can they file for bankruptcy? Do they just disappear and leave the banks high and dry?.......HOw can the economy ever build back up with everyone getting such a small price for everything they lost...What have all these Countries been donating too - if its not FEMA? This money should be spent on these people not our screwed up goverment...

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 2:33 pm

Didn't she have flood insurance?

Has she been told that, that is ALL she will get from any source?

Has she been told that no private organizations will help her?

Is what she is recieving relativally smaller than what others will recieve?

Do we have the whole story?

BTS · Post by **BTS** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 2:50 pm

Just a question........... When did the Federal Govt. start paying off private mortgages anyways? Is this a constitutional right I missed somewhere?

I can see FEMA helping with the cost of living until you can get your house rebuilt or have settled with your insurance company, but paying off the mortgage seems far fetched to me.............

Correct me if I am wrong here.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 2:56 pm

BTS wrote: Just a question........... When did the Federal Govt. start paying off private mortgages anyways? Is this a constitutional right I missed somewhere?

I can see FEMA helping with the cost of living until you can get your house rebuilt or have settled with your insurance company, but paying off the mortgage seems far fetched to me.............

Correct me if I am wrong here.

May I join you in asking this question?

CountryDweller · Post by **CountryDweller** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 3:53 pm

BTS wrote: Just a question........... When did the Federal Govt. start paying off private mortgages anyways? Is this a constitutional right I missed somewhere?

I can see FEMA helping with the cost of living until you can get your house rebuilt or have settled with your insurance company, but paying off the mortgage seems far fetched to me.............

Correct me if I am wrong here.
I agree...didn't she have homeowners insurance that will cover most of the costs? I think there must be more to this story.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:51 pm

BTS wrote: Just a question........... When did the Federal Govt. start paying off private mortgages anyways? Is this a constitutional right I missed somewhere?

I can see FEMA helping with the cost of living until you can get your house rebuilt or have settled with your insurance company, but paying off the mortgage seems far fetched to me.............

Correct me if I am wrong here.
As I understand it, FEMA's bailing out the insurance companies, not the citizens. FEMA takes over for the insurance companies so they won't go bankrupt paying the policies they contracted. I guess they used up all their profits paying the politicians to vote for FEMA.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:57 pm

So AC, does that mean the homeowner only gets a percentage of what their insurance policy covered?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 6:02 pm

chonsigirl wrote: So AC, does that mean the homeowner only gets a percentage of what their insurance policy covered?
John Stossel got his Florida beach house completely rebuilt ... twice!

mominiowa · Post by **mominiowa** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 6:52 pm

From what she was saying-- there are people who can not get flood insurance there..they were too close to the water. The insurance she has will cover only the loss value because there area was looted...So they are working with her on theft cost only. They are not returning phone calls of course and she has been in Iowa. She feels she has a home with her brother here and isn't accepting from the Red Cross because there are to many people that need it more down there. She has done all the correct paper work but still is being offered a settlement of only $11,000. She is tired and devastated. Her sister in law has told her that they need to argue this and go there..she just says she can not do any more then what she has until they tell her its her time to talk to them....I saw that interview about that guys house in Florida..$250,000 each time it was taken by a storm...but these people have to go without? She is an educated woman from Iowa..she has one child, and enjoyed her life there. Worked full time and was proud to have just purchased her home a couple years ago.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 6:56 pm

Tell her to call a lawyer. There must be dozens that would love the chance at a case like that.

orangesox1 · Post by **orangesox1** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:04 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it a weak levy bank that really caused the flooding, and if the bank had been repaired years ago it would have held back the water. That can't be seen as an act of God it would be the council that is held responsible for that, as the levy has to be maintained by them. Our council is paranoid about maintaining our levy as they will be sued if it fails due to their incompitance

Thats just what I have heard here in Australia.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 11:20 pm

Homes that are built in a flood plain either have to purchase flood insurance or be self insured. It is almost impossible these days to purchase or build in a flood plain without knowing the risks going in. I have a real hard time with people who continue to build on barrier islands or flood plains. They expect the taxpayers who chose to build or purchase in less desirable yet safer locations to subsidized flood insurance programs to pay them when the inevitable happens. Earthquakes, volcanos and tornadoes are much harder to predict than floods and those people really need tax dollars to help.

Accountable, I think they will have a hard time with their case in court. I'm no attorney though.

mominiowa · Post by **mominiowa** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 11:28 pm

Your right Clint, no attorney will touch it because - its life...you can't change the choice you made to live there...no its not fair BUT~...and she really just wants out of everything and to move on..She knew the risks but yet loved the city..She understands this..But the sadness of it all is..she will be making payments on a house that is destroyed (and hers is completely gone, moved off the foundation, and the walls are missing) She did have a newer car and gets insurance from that...so far, they said that if it is caused by an Act of God they will not - but since the levy broke and it wasn't Katrina that ruined it - there is a chance...Can you believe how they will finagle things? I just hope she gets enough to replace her car, sell her land- and get a start. The city is talking about buying some land from the people and creating a wet land...I hope she gets picked but doesn't think she is close enough to the area they are talking about. Its so sad...but yet she has an attitude like no other...MOVE ON - Keep going cuz ya can't sit around feeling sorry for yourself!

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 11:34 pm

mominiowa wrote: Your right Clint, no attorney will touch it because - its life...you can't change the choice you made to live there...no its not fair BUT~...and she really just wants out of everything and to move on..She knew the risks but yet loved the city..She understands this..But the sadness of it all is..she will be making payments on a house that is destroyed (and hers is completely gone, moved off the foundation, and the walls are missing) She did have a newer car and gets insurance from that...so far, they said that if it is caused by an Act of God they will not - but since the levy broke and it wasn't Katrina that ruined it - there is a chance...Can you believe how they will finagle things? I just hope she gets enough to replace her car, sell her land- and get a start. The city is talking about buying some land from the people and creating a wet land...I hope she gets picked but doesn't think she is close enough to the area they are talking about. Its so sad...but yet she has an attitude like no other...MOVE ON - Keep going cuz ya can't sit around feeling sorry for yourself!
Very sad. I'm glad she has such a great attitude. We still live in a country where a good attitude with a willingness to work can overcome a lack of insurance.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 3:31 am

Sounds like theyre trying to rush the process; just get the line moving. I wouldnt accept it. The squeaky wheel gets the oil so to speak and an attorney is never a bad idea when dealing with such things.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 8:10 am

New laws. New laws. Everything needs a new law??

The levees broke, arguably due to gov't negligence. One can argue the gov't should never have built the levee in the first place but they did. Explicit or implied promise of protection. The protection failed. That's grounds for big-time class action lawsuit.

For other situations in general: Fair trade rules, etc. require full disclosure from seller to buyer when it comes to homes & property. The buyer knows what he's getting. I say screw 'em. You build a million-dollar house on the beach, it's your responsibility, not mine. It falls apart, it's your cost, not mine. Forget laws requiring anything! You don't want to insure against a sure thing, fine. Call your cousin for help.

It makes me sick that politicians think nothing of giving away millions of our tax dollars to secure thousands in campaign contributions.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 9:23 am

I think Orange is right.

Taking the pocket change FEMA is offering will cut her off from getting just compensation.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 9:30 am

Accountable wrote: New laws. New laws. Everything needs a new law??

The levees broke, arguably due to gov't negligence. One can argue the gov't should never have built the levee in the first place but they did. Explicit or implied promise of protection. The protection failed. That's grounds for big-time class action lawsuit.

It makes me sick that politicians think nothing of giving away millions of our tax dollars to secure thousands in campaign contributions.

I see your point and it is a good one. They will have a hard time proving neglect but in the process of trying they will be pushing the buttons that get action.

Most of our politicians sold their soul (if they had one) to win their first partisan election. Anything after that is fair game to them. :-5

CVX · Post by **CVX** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 9:35 am

Clint wrote: Homes that are built in a flood plain either have to purchase flood insurance or be self insured. It is almost impossible these days to purchase or build in a flood plain without knowing the risks going in. I have a real hard time with people who continue to build on barrier islands or flood plains. They expect the taxpayers who chose to build or purchase in less desirable yet safer locations to subsidized flood insurance programs to pay them when the inevitable happens. Earthquakes, volcanos and tornadoes are much harder to predict than floods and those people really need tax dollars to help.

Accountable, I think they will have a hard time with their case in court. I'm no attorney though.

I agree with this. It seems everyone expects somebody else to bail them out when things go wrong. Either that, or they expect to be able to blame someone else for their woes.

Personal responsibility plays here. If you live in a flood plain and cannot get insurance, that should be your first clue.

Pearl Harbor · Post by **Pearl Harbor** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 10:17 am

mominiowa wrote: From what she was saying-- there are people who can not get flood insurance there..they were too close to the water. The insurance she has will cover only the loss value because there area was looted...So they are working with her on theft cost only. They are not returning phone calls of course and she has been in Iowa. She feels she has a home with her brother here and isn't accepting from the Red Cross because there are to many people that need it more down there. She has done all the correct paper work but still is being offered a settlement of only $11,000. She is tired and devastated. Her sister in law has told her that they need to argue this and go there..she just says she can not do any more then what she has until they tell her its her time to talk to them....I saw that interview about that guys house in Florida..$250,000 each time it was taken by a storm...but these people have to go without? She is an educated woman from Iowa..she has one child, and enjoyed her life there. Worked full time and was proud to have just purchased her home a couple years ago.

I think your friend is either being dishonest with you or herself. The Federal Government took over Flood Insurance YEARS ago. Everyone who owns a home knows this. Why? Because if you try to get flood insurance, your insurance carrier will give you contact information for the Federal program.

http://www.fema.gov/nfip/yrhm.shtm

mominiowa · Post by **mominiowa** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 11:58 am

Thats what she IS saying..That FEMA is giving the insurance benefit to her -ot her insurance..becasue she didn't have any extra flood insurance.. She is not blaming anyone - she knew the risks-but what I don't understand is how all these people can get their homes on the beach fronts covered..-but she is only alloted $11,000? She isn't complaining,I posted this so we could debate what we feel is right and wrong...I believe she is telling the truth and I also believe after watching TV the other night and listening to that guy say FEMA gave him $250,00 not only once BUT 2 times to rebuild his beach front house...that they should be alloted more then $11,000 .....

ubetta · Post by **ubetta** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:29 pm

Her mortgage encompasses the value of the land and the home when she purchased it. She still has the land. I don't know if there's been contamination of her property (land), that, I believe would be covered under a separate issue.

She was able to get Flood insurance, she chose not to (I think, from what you are saying), and she's suffuring the consequences.

From what I understand, you get FEMA money to get started and then the insurance company gives you money, less what FEMA has given. If she didn't have the proper insurance coverage for replacement costs, then she had the wrong policy. At least, that's how I understand it. If some guy got $250K from FEMA, then that was applied to insurance proceeds he would have gotten. And I'm sure his insurance premiums were quite expensive. It just might be that you are comparing apples and oranges?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 1:12 pm

How could she get a mortgage and NOT have it covered? Here in the UK it is a condition of any mortgage that you insure the property for it's rebuild cost, if you don't use the lender's insurance you must supply proof you have it. If you can't get insurance you don't get a mortgage, it's as simple as that. Many insurers are beginning to refuse cover to houses built on flood plains, as time goes on that will become more prevalent rendering some houses unsellable.

ubetta · Post by **ubetta** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 2:34 pm

Hmmm. I don't know. Do we have anyone in the insurance industry on the board?

I wonder if it's different from state to state? I know that I have to have it, but, I am NOT required to carry flood insurance...I had to sign off on not getting it because of the area I'm in (I'm not in a high flood risk district, although it's *possible* under extreme circumstances I could have damage). But if I were closer to the beach, I would be required to have it.

CountryDweller · Post by **CountryDweller** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 3:17 pm

ubetta wrote: Hmmm. I don't know. Do we have anyone in the insurance industry on the board?

I wonder if it's different from state to state? I know that I have to have it, but, I am NOT required to carry flood insurance...I had to sign off on not getting it because of the area I'm in (I'm not in a high flood risk district, although it's *possible* under extreme circumstances I could have damage). But if I were closer to the beach, I would be required to have it.
In my State, it is required to have full insurance coverage and flood insurance if you live in a 100 year flood plain, to get a morgage here. However, after the morgage is paid off, you can cancel all your insurance if you so choose. The banks here make sure their butts are covered.

orangesox1 · Post by **orangesox1** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 3:27 pm

gmc wrote: How could she get a mortgage and NOT have it covered? Here in the UK it is a condition of any mortgage that you insure the property for it's rebuild cost, if you don't use the lender's insurance you must supply proof you have it. If you can't get insurance you don't get a mortgage, it's as simple as that. Many insurers are beginning to refuse cover to houses built on flood plains, as time goes on that will become more prevalent rendering some houses unsellable.

Thats an interesting point, I have to have insurance on my house because of the mortgage, but I am not covered for flood either. My house is solid and wouldn't wash away but contents would be ruined. most houses around here now are built up about 3 meters of the ground and on posts or you can't build.

mominiowa · Post by **mominiowa** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 3:39 pm

We - too , have to have insurance with a mortgage...When I lived in Southern Iowa, by the Missouri boarder...we had to have earthquake insurance.It was a whole whopping 30$ a year through State Farm...because there is a fault line in Missouri...But we payed it with no problem, actually laughed about it...a earthquake in IOWA..... The said thing I think is the people who like to live there, maybe its all they have known, etc. or rent..and bam - its all gone...

My sister was saying when they took the tour of N.O., that the tour guide on the bus told them that if there was ever a category 4 or higher that this part would all be gone, as they drove down a street... Its kind of a catch 20-20 - you want to live in a safe place...you want to stay where you are because its all you know....but YOU know that you could loose it all.....It's just a persons choice I guess....:rolleyes: