Quantcast
National Underwriter Property And Casualty Insurance News.

Breaking News
NU Exclusives

 Fate Of Taylor NFIP Wind Bill Unclear; Compromise Bill Surfaces 

 
Published 7/28/2010 

Print This Article
Return To Article
Normal Text
Large Text

NU Online News Service, July 28, 4:00 p.m. EDT

As Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., continues to lobby the House for his bill adding wind to the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), another bill in the Senate seeks a compromise to settle the “wind vs. water” issue.

It is unclear for now whether Rep. Taylor will be able to get a House vote on his bill—H.R. 1264, the Multiple Peril Insurance Act—before the House leaves Friday for its month-long summer recess.

The bill was cleared for a vote last week but was pulled from the floor before the vote could take place.

House Democratic staffers said action was postponed because a debate on a jobs bill took longer than expected, and House members had already made travel connections out of town in anticipation of an early departure.

The bill has little support in the Senate, and Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., is planning to introduce legislation Thursday that will seek to bridge the gap over the controversial wind vs. water issue that dates back to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Under the five-page Wicker bill, should a wind vs. water claim arise and the NFIP and wind insurer—either a private carrier or state wind pool—not agree on how to divide the claim, the policyholder would immediately receive 50 percent of the claim payout from the NFIP and 50 percent from the insurer.

The claim would then go to an arbitration panel to settle the differences between the NFIP and the wind insurer.

Spokesmen for Rep. Taylor declined to comment directly on the issue today, but acknowledged that they are still seeking a floor vote on the measure before the House recesses.

“It is unclear what will happen,” said a Rep. Taylor staffer who asked not to be named.

“We are talking to the House leadership, and have met with several groups within the House, but action might be postponed until September, the staffer acknowledged.

In comments on Tuesday to The Hill, a Capitol Hill newspaper, Rep. Taylor said, “I hate to say this, but another hurricane may have to happen” for the bill to pass.

Addressing damage to homes by high winds, Rep. Taylor said, “Nothing has changed since [Hurricane] Katrina.”

The bill is opposed by all elements of the insurance industry, and the Obama administration last Thursday said it opposes the bill.

In a statement today, David Sampson, president and CEO of the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, said, “This proposed legislation is unnecessary and fraught with negative consequences that will harm consumers and the marketplace at a fragile time for our American economy.”

He added, “This approach is a mistake that could deliver devastating results to the U.S. jobs market and add billions to the federal deficit.”



Comment on This Article

Name:
Email (will not be published):
Subject:
Comment:

    • 7/29/2010 11:03:59 AM
    • Rmawk
    • Wind v water
    • Why don't we just privatize the flood program!? It's already 18 billion in the whole. There would be actuarially sound rates unlike the current rates. Then the insurance companies themselves could deal with the wind v water debate. They could easily create coastal policies that include both wind & water coverage. So, either way the insured is covered.
    • 8/2/2010 5:42:44 PM
    • Prudent Property Owner
    • Wind VS Water
    • A majority of the folks with Wind VS water issues either did not carry flood insurance or did not have adequate limits. These claimants had to assert that their damage was wind related to have any chance of getting paid. To elimiate this problem, everyone with a mortgage loan should be required to carry flood insurance in an amount equal to their HO limit or the max NFIP limit. More folks will have coverage, there will be less litigation, NFIP gets a spread of risk and more premium, and a lot more of federal disaster funding will be funded through the NFIP. Include in the HO and Flood policy a loss agreement that says that the insured get paid policy limits or up the lowest limits, and the HO carrier and NFIP/WYO carrier settle up with each other.

Recent Issues


Archived Issues

Most Read Articles


Related Articles


From Our Partners
Provides practical, authoritative sales and management information for indepent retail and wholesale producers of P&C insurance.
Online training, course development, live events, CE program management and processing services for financial, tax and insurance professionals.
Highline Data’s Insurance Analyst PRO is the market’s premier source for insurance industry statutory and GAAP financial filings. Our suite of online advanced search and analytical tools serves the industry’s need for timely data on more than 8,000 companies.


www.summitbusinessmedia.com © Copyright National Underwriter Property & Casualty. A Summit Business Media publication. All Rights Reserved.