CA couple loses home insurance after draining pool to save water (Insurance used drone footage)

[drakkor]

Story here: ABC7 News Bay Area

 

[Meta4]

Story here: ABC7 News Bay Area

This has nothing at all to do with drones.
The story explains several times that the insurance companies mentioned aerial photography from fixed wing aircraft and satellites.
But some people mistakenly assume that any aerial photography must come from drones.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Insurance companies have some weird methods of business, discarding policyholders that seemingly have a good track record, are faithful customers, but maybe they are just culling out areas in general to reduce risk where claims might be a fraction of a % higher than other regions.

The story explains several times that the insurance companies mentioned aerial photography from fixed wing aircraft and satellites.

I thought that too, then immediately after that in the segment the consumer advocate does say they are using drones too.

I think in this case though, there is better more efficient tech using commercial aerial imaging and software to pick up anomalies in photos to investigate further.
They might use drones to do final close in inspections perhaps.

 

[Meta4]

I thought that too, then immediately after that in the segment the consumer advocate does say they are using drones too.

The consumer advocate is a prime example of someone automatically assuming that aerial photography must come from drones.

 

[umanbean]

Sorry, but nowhere in that news video did it say the woman who drained her pool had her insurance canceled because the insurance company used drone footage. In fact the quote from her insurance company specifically stated they used fixed-wing and satellite images to review properties.

 

[anotherlab]

Insurance companies are all about the bottom line. Unless they are seeking visual information about a claim submitted by a homeowner, they are not going to deal with the hassle of flying drones over neighborhoods when they can just purchase the imagery from commercial sources.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Insurance companies are all about the bottom line. Unless they are seeking visual information about a claim submitted by a homeowner, they are not going to deal with the hassle of flying drones over neighborhoods when they can just purchase the imagery from commercial sources.

Spot on, they MIGHT use a drone to assess closer any risk they spot from aerial photos to get a more accurate view of any perceived problem property.
But as with the roof example in the news story, they might just blanket ban dodgy looking places and let the property owners inform them of an insurers misjudgment.

 

[anotherlab]

Spot on, they MIGHT use a drone to assess closer any risk they spot from aerial photos to get a more accurate view of any perceived problem property.
But as with the roof example in the news story, they might just blanket ban dodgy looking places and let the property owners inform them of an insurers misjudgment.

With the rise of natural disasters in the last few years. insurance companies have been pulling out of California, Florida, and Louisiana. For their remaining customers, they have become aggressive in finding ways to decline to renew the policies or cancel them outright.

After watching that video, the homeowners who drained their pool should have just covered over the pool. A drained inground pool being used for planters? That's a huge liability issue if someone fell in.

 

[umanbean]

That's a huge liability issue if someone fell in.

That was my very first thought. Trip and fall into an empty pool, especially on the deep end, you're going to be seriously injured... and, like you said, a huge potential liability in the eyes of the insurance company. Probably the reason for the cancellation.

 

[umanbean]

the homeowners who drained their pool should have just covered over the pool.

Exactly, that would have cut down drastically on the water evaporation problem and having to add more so often. But sadly, too many people don't have enough common sense to come in out of the rain.

 

[anotherlab]

That was my very first thought. Trip and fall into an empty pool, especially on the deep end, you're going to be seriously injured... and, like you said, a huge potential liability in the eyes of the insurance company. Probably the reason for the cancellation.

In the video, the homeowner gave the reason for the cancellation. By draining the pool, it was no longer being maintained and that violated a covenant in the insurance policy that the homeowner was responsible for maintaining the home and the assets belonging to the home.

 

[shb]

Like it really takes a reason for insurance companies to raise rates.

 

[anotherlab]

Like it really takes a reason for insurance companies to raise rates.

It's not that they want to raise rates, they are looking for any reason to cancel the policy and to close down their operation in that state.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

It's not that they want to raise rates, they are looking for any reason to cancel the policy and to close down their operation in that state.

Australian insurance companies are doing this in the past year or two, raising premiums to ridiculous levels to basically eliminate policies in particular flood zones in recent flooded areas, where costs run into the billions.
I've read many news articles of premiums for some upwards to AU$30,000 a year to cover a home, that's about US$19,500.
Many now simply don't carry home or contents cover in some regions now.