Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

North Carolina braces for potential 42.2% rise in homeowners' insurance costs


jayboogieman
 Share

Recommended Posts

Quote

Insurance companies in the state, through the North Carolina Rate Bureau (NCRB), have formally requested a significant hike in homeowners' insurance premiums. The proposed increase of 42.2%, announced by Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey, could take effect as early as Aug. 1.

This marks a notable jump from the 24.5% increase requested by the NCRB back in 2020. That proposal was ultimately negotiated down to 7.9% following discussions with Commissioner Causey.

Source

Link of the proposed rates by city and county

The proposed rate link is a PDF file.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, jayboogieman said:

Source

Link of the proposed rates by city and county

The proposed rate link is a PDF file.

At this point the only thing that insurance protects is the insurance company.  We should all stop paying it.  fug it.  I don't know where in the blue hell these companies think all this money is going to continue to come from.  More Americans are living paycheck to paycheck then ever before even above the median income. We are completely fuged as a country and seeing a revolt very soon would not surprise me. There is nothing left to squeeze out of 80% of Americans.  It's scary

Edited by toldozer
  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, toldozer said:

At this point the only thing that insurance protects is the insurance company.  We should all stop paying it.  fug it.  I don't know where in the blue hell these companies think all this money is going to continue to come from.  More Americans are living paycheck to paycheck then ever before even above the median income. We are completely fuged as a country and seeing a revolt very soon would not surprise me. There is nothing left to squeeze out of 80% of Americans.  It's scary

They'll squeeze everything they can from us including our homes. That said, odds are the insurance companies will get around an average of a 20% increase. They wanted a 25% increase a couple of years ago and got 8%, so they're being greedy again.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

They'll squeeze everything they can from us including our homes. That said, odds are the insurance companies will get around an average of a 20% increase. They wanted a 25% increase a couple of years ago and got 8%, so they're being greedy again.

Some areas on that list were 99%. Seas are going to rise and start swallowing us up. They act like if that happened that they would pay out anyway.   Apparently up in the mountains they only need 6%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, toldozer said:

Some areas on that list were 99%. Seas are going to rise and start swallowing us up. They act like if that happened that they would pay out anyway.   Apparently up in the mountains they only need 6%

Yeah, they're hammering the coastal areas. I sort of get raising those rates, not that much though, because of hurricanes and NC gets hit often. That said, places 2 or more hours inland(Pitt, Wayne, Lenoir counties, etc) shouldn't getting hit as hard as they are. If you notice the mountain counties that have low populations have the lower rates, those that are more of a destination place have higher rates even if they're not as high as the rest of the state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

Yeah, they're hammering the coastal areas. I sort of get raising those rates, not that much though, because of hurricanes and NC gets hit often. That said, places 2 or more hours inland(Pitt, Wayne, Lenoir counties, etc) shouldn't getting hit as hard as they are. If you notice the mountain counties that have low populations have the lower rates, those that are more of a destination place have higher rates even if they're not as high as the rest of the state.

Oh you mean where there is more money. That's their game not that the rates need to be raised at different amount (outside the coast which I get) but these areas have more money let's take it

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fortunately (or unfortunately) P&C companies are not health insurers making obscene profits while charging $150 for advil.

P&C insurance companies have been losing money the past few years. The article quoted tells you why. They asked for 24.5% and only got 7%. So now they need 42%.

This is on top of the fact that your home and auto insurance already contains a dictionary full of exclusions. And if you make a claim they might drop you.

And keep in mind depending on where you live the company you may not even want your business.

The eventual solution is that home insurance gets handled by the state/subsidized and not private insurers. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2024 at 2:01 PM, LinvilleGorge said:

There honestly seems to be a concerted effort to reduce home ownership. You'll own nothing and you'll be happy.

This is a massive deal right now. Investment groups buying up real estate left and right have been a major factor in our country's inflation and housing crisis. And they are making money hand over fist by then renting the properties out to people who no longer have a choice but to rent. They really found a barrel and just put everyone else over it.

And the insurance rate hike, in great part, is to cover the asses of those invested in this. And we must also remember that of any group in the US, the insurance industry has traditionally owned more real estate than any other group... including more than actual real estate developers.

It's not that the fix is in, it's that there's always another fix being found to do us in with.

I believe in capitalism but I believe it requires a cop on the beat to work properly. They bought the cops around here a long time ago.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 2/2/2024 at 3:31 PM, Davidson Deac II said:

Fwiw, this is probably a negotation.

They ask for outrageous amounts, get a 1/3 of what they ask for, which is what they wanted in the first place.

Usually doesn't work like this. If the company submits something that is questionable from a data or math standpoint it gets sent back. Some real nerds work for the DOI.

Meaning 42% is probably really what is justified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Happy Panther said:

Usually doesn't work like this. If the company submits something that is questionable from a data or math standpoint it gets sent back. Some real nerds work for the DOI.

Meaning 42% is probably really what is justified.

Admittedly I don't read the details, but didn't they originally ask for much higher amounts the last couple of times, and what they got ended up being less than half of what they originally requested?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • okay I found this and it sounds like my hopes for the first surgery being not such a great job seems like it could be actual reality.  I only hoped because that would give a better chance for recovery and ia a possible scenario so I just thought it could be possible. Had no real evidence of it. But I’ll be damned.    This is a detailed report of Brooks’ surgery and the condition of his knee after the failed repair.     https://x.com/jmthrivept/status/2055743129408704806?s= Sparked by some very good questions by @CoachspeakIndex, here’s some info on Jonathon Brooks: 1. Speculation that the first graft/ACLR by Dr. Cooper didn’t “take” or at least was too lax, leading to failure and re-tear. Brooks dealt with issues cutting, progressing in his rehab into the early stages of 2024 and then re-tore it late 2024, requiring a second ACLR in January 2025 (essentially revision). Notably, CAR prolonged Brooks’ rehab process through Sept-Oct due to issues progressing into the next stages of rehab. 2. Second surgery performed by Dr. Neal ElAttrache, who has extensive experience with revisions. He did a double bundle technique, harvesting graft from Brooks’ left patellar tendon and a strip of his right IT Band (his right patellar tendon had been utilized for the prior graft in 2023. The double bundle technique significantly increases rotational stability of the knee, leading to a stronger and more secure graft/reconstruction. Also to note, Brooks’ surgery wasn’t significantly delayed, meaning that the tunnels from his prior ACLR were in good shape and they didn’t need to perform bone grafts to fill in (would have delayed 2nd surgery by 5-6 months). Essentially, reading the tea leaves tells me that everything else except for the graft itself was still in good quality within his knee. Good sign for future.  3. Typically, you see a performance increase anywhere from 16-20 months post-revision. Brooks will be ~21 months out from his second surgery by the time Week 1 hits. His knee should be more stable and stronger this time around, with adequate time for healing and return to all movement patterns. I’m not viewing this situation as a typical “Player __ had TWO ACL tears, he’s cooked” situation. Rather, I’m viewing it as the first procedure failed, but the second procedure is significantly stronger and should allow him to return to form this time around. I don’t know why it posted as a link but there it is.  
    • Jackie, any more reps tomorrow, or is that it for this session?  thanks for the work
    • How can you say they aren’t trying to win now with all the moves made in free agency? Or is trading first round picks the only way to be win now? I’d be fine never trading another first round pick again, win now be damned.
×
×
  • Create New...