A nice lady from over 1000 miles away called a few weeks ago asking me to do an elevation certificate on a house in a city about 30 miles from me that she owns but rents to her son and his family.?ÿ I explained it would be several weeks before I could get to it.?ÿ This house appears to be in the flood plain but, based on some work I have done not too far away, I bet it is only in by about one foot of depth.?ÿ That would still be hitting the foundation walls/crawlspace.?ÿ Not too bad.
She called back on Friday to cancel the job.?ÿ She is quickly attempting to unload the recently purchased house.?ÿ She told me that because it was not her primary residence FEMA would not give her a break on the flood rating no matter what my work showed.?ÿ The number she told me for the annual flood insurance policy would be nearly 20 percent of the apparent value of the property.
Can this be true?
From what I've been told by clients, insurance rates vary widely depending on who the insurer is.?ÿ
One client was told he had to pay $700/month, he shopped around and ended up paying less than $100/month with another carrier.?ÿ
?ÿ
At 20% of the property value, it would have to flood every 5 years to break even.
What about this aspect of primary residences vs other properties?
She told me that because it was not her primary residence FEMA would not give her a break on the flood rating no matter what my work showed.
I found this snippet from a National Flood Insurance Program something or another that I sent to our local floodplain administrator asking if this was the general direction that FEMA/NFIP is going these days. ?ÿI did not get a clear answer:
Do you think that NFIP/FEMA are heading more toward this approach ??Acquiring and demolishing these properties is one alternative to paying for repeated claims,??
The above example I gave was for a business property. One thing I didn't mention was that the business owner needed to refinance with a different lender to get the much lower flood insurance rate.
However, I'm no expert, most of our work is removing structures from the 100 year flood zone. Our Zone A maps are rife with miss-mapped zones.?ÿ
I remember sitting in a class a few years back where we were told that FEMA was moving toward actuarial rates and that properties would no longer be grandfathered. One on the consequences mentioned was that some properties would likely become practically unmarketable due to insurance cost vs property value.?ÿ
I know of at least one instance where this happened, locally. We did a topo survey for a residential property on a riverbank, where the flood insurance payouts had apparently been some of the highest in the nation. The value of the property had been paid out multiple times over by the time the decision was made.
The county and the feds partnered up to buy the land and turn it into a riverside park...
@rover83 this is but the latest chapter in this ongoing project.?ÿ something approaching 2 or 3 entire zip codes have been acquired in the past 20 years.
?ÿ
Those of us who did not build in the SFHA subsidize those that did. If congress ever stops waiving the law ending this practice you will see massive buyouts and abandonment.?ÿ
I say we roll it into the next disaster. Should be a few more in 2020...
It's always interesting to see how some folks can cling to denial for so long, but it doesn't surprise me. I'm originally from Houston (and lived in NOLA when Katrina hit). TS Allison hit just before I graduated high school, and I did a lot of surveying down south in the wake of Ike.
Of course, I don't give a hoot about having a "forever home" and after seeing Katrina and Ike roll right over the levees/seawalls it blows my mind that someone would want to bet on something like that. As nice as it was to grow up there, I was glad when my folks sold their home and moved away right after Harvey.
Born on a hilltop.?ÿ Live on a hilltop.?ÿ Have never lived in a flood zone.?ÿ Have no intention of ever living in one.
Ignorance of what could happen started people building in flood plains.?ÿ Foolishness is what keeps them there.
In 2007 FEMA stepped in and bought a bunch of properties/houses in a nearby city then deeded them all to the City with the stipulation they never allow anything to be constructed on them.?ÿ The fine people of the city now get to pay beaucoup bucks every year to keep the grass mowed down to prevent other problems from occurring.
Born on a hilltop.?ÿ Live on a hilltop.?ÿ Have never lived in a flood zone.?ÿ Have no intention of ever living in one.
Ignorance of what could happen started people building in flood plains.?ÿ Foolishness is what keeps them there.
In 2007 FEMA stepped in and bought a bunch of properties/houses in a nearby city then deeded them all to the City with the stipulation they never allow anything to be constructed on them.?ÿ The fine people of the city now get to pay beaucoup bucks every year to keep the grass mowed down to prevent other problems from occurring.
They shouldn't have specified that nothing could be built. They should have specified that federal insurance would never be issued for it.
I can imagine the city wanting to do something like build a picnic shelter that would survive a flood, but this stipulation would make it illegal.