Opus the Penguin <opusthepenguin+usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
news:Xns9A7D80DED64F7opusthepenguinnettax@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Mr C (camsoccer@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
) wrote:
>> On Apr 10, 9:42 pm, Snidely <Snidely....@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> On Apr 10, 6:07 pm, "Jim Beaver" <jumble...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>> > "Dover Beach" <moon.blanc...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> > > variety of companies. I suspect Geico doesn't do Calif.
>>> > > homeowners so they have some deal to pass it on.
>>>
>>> > Heckuva lotta Geico commercials here, though. (SoCal)
>>>
>>> But it's for things that move, innit? They may not have the
>>> proper forms filed with the state insurance commissioner to do
>>> houses.
>>
>> Too high risk for their taste? California: earthquakes,
>> landslides, wildfires, tidal waves, falling off into the sea, that
>> kind of thing.
>>
>
> I wonder if California houses are actuarially at greater risk of
> catastrophes that require replacement or at least major renovation.
>
They were perfectly happy to consider insuring it as long as it was
owner-occupied, and the owner a human being rather than a trust.
--
Dover
|
