2015 Oklahoma Earthquake Discussion

[BBatesokc]

Anyone have any current earthquake coverage endorsement info they could share?

Just called liberty mutual and the endorsement would be $209 annually with a 15% of total coverage deductible. Its the high deductible that has me always deciding against the coverage so far.

Examples: $250,000 home ($37.5K deductible) $500,000 home ($75k deductible)

[sooner88]

The quake woke me up this morning... it shook the whole building for 5-10 seconds.

[BBatesokc]

A couple of notes on the insurance issues. First, there is a waiting period for companies to write coverage after a quake of certain magnatide within a certain distance from your home - I think it is 3.5 on the scale and a 30 (maybe 60 day waiting period). If another quake happens during the waiting period then you start the clock over...

I asked specifically about that when I called liberty Mutual and the agent told me I would not have any waiting period. They said that would only be in the case of flood insurance.

[OkiePoke]

So, how will they prove that it wasn't natural? And if it wasn't natural, wouldn't the company who cause it have to pay out somehow?

[okatty]

I asked specifically about that when I called liberty Mutual and the agent told me I would not have any waiting period. They said that would only be in the case of flood insurance.

Interesting....I guess that is a company by company deal then. State Farm at least initially had one but those could be a thing of the past now. I bet they will be getting some calls today!

[mkjeeves]

Anyone have any current earthquake coverage endorsement info they could share?

Just called liberty mutual and the endorsement would be $209 annually with a 15% of total coverage deductible. Its the high deductible that has me always deciding against the coverage so far.

Examples: $250,000 home ($37.5K deductible) $500,000 home ($75k deductible)

I have my insurance with them and earthquake with the same 15% deductible. As a line item it didn't cost nearly that much. We're paying $.19 per thousand dollars of covered structure value. (We have home and several outbuildings covered.)

I discussed the high deductible with my commercial insurance broker and she said that was very common if not standard for Oklahoma, that I would be lucky to change insurance and find different terms or possibly even get a new policy with the restriction on writing a policy within some time limit of the most recent earthquake. But I talked to a friend who says he had no trouble getting his house covered with a better deal. I don't recall who his is with. I had State Farm before Liberty. Did have earthquake insurance. It was pretty cheap. It did not cover masonry. I do not remember if the deducible was high but they priced themselves out of the market two years ago overall and we switched to Liberty.

We've had two claims this last year with Liberty. Hail in the spring and an ice storm. No hassle at all dealing with them but hail and wind have a 1% deductible. It will be interesting to see what happens with premiums next renewal.

[rezman]

With Farmers, we had to wait 30 days after that "big one" in 2011. And there couldn't be any significant activity in that time. The deductible at that time was $3500. With our recent review, we downsized some things and switched some things around on the policy to save on our premiums, but EQ deductible went up to $5000. There is a cap on the payout but I'll have to go back over the paperwork for the exact figure.

[mkjeeves]

Interesting to compare terms here. Some have masonry repairs covered, some don't, some have limits to how much they will pay on masonry repairs. (I have two very large and tall chimneys and a mix of brick veneer siding on the rest of the house. I expect the chimneys would be the first thing to go if there was much of a shake.)

https://www.ok.gov/oid/Consumers/Ins...icy_Forms.html

And then there's this. I don't think I got a notice.

Companies writing earthquake insurance in Oklahoma have reacted to the flurry of earthquakes in various ways. Some have amended their policy forms to cover damage resulting from wastewater injection. Others have simply been waiving the man-made exclusion. A third group still excludes quakes induced by wastewater injection.

Insurers providing earthquake coverage have 45 days to issue a clarifying notice to policyholders and licensed insurance agents. The notice must contain the following:

EARTHQUAKES RESULTING FROM OIL AND GAS ACTIVITIES

Subject to all policy provisions, the coverage provided by this policy (IS) or (IS NOT) intended to cover earthquake damage resulting from:

a. extracting oil or gas from below the earth’s surface by any process, including but not limited to hydraulic fracturing or drilling; or

b. injecting or inserting any substance, including but not limited to, water and wastewater, below the earth’s surface for any purpose; or

c. storage of any substance, including but not limited to, water and wastewater below the earth’s surface for any purpose; or

d. any combination of a. – c. above.

Oklahoma Insurers Required to Clarify Earthquake Coverage

[Brownwood]

Shouldn't this be in the political thread ?

Bellaboo,

I believe the post to be appropriately categorized as the topic of this thread is "Oklahoma Earthquake Discussion." It appears to be an open forum for all issues related to earthquakes, including but not limited to the the political issues associated with earthquakes. The thread is not limited to the geology or science of earthquakes but appears to be more broad based for general commentary.

I noticed you didn't suggest the numerous posts related to insurance coverage be moved to the Insurance thread. I'm respectfully curious if you or someone in your family is employed either directly or indirectly with the energy industry. I'm not against the energy companies, I'm simply for responsible regulation where the people are protected as much as the companies. In my opinion, we should protect those who could be harmed through no fault of their own over increased profit to a business or individual. We may disagree, but please keep the discussion open.

[Of Sound Mind]

Bellaboo,

I believe the post to be appropriately categorized as the topic of this thread is "Oklahoma Earthquake Discussion." It appears to be an open forum for all issues related to earthquakes, including but not limited to the the political issues associated with earthquakes. The thread is not limited to the geology or science of earthquakes but appears to be more broad based for general commentary.

I noticed you didn't suggest the numerous posts related to insurance coverage be moved to the Insurance thread. I'm respectfully curious if you or someone in your family is employed either directly or indirectly with the energy industry. I'm not against the energy companies, I'm simply for responsible regulation where the people are protected as much as the companies. In my opinion, we should protect those who could be harmed through no fault of their own over increased profit to a business or individual. We may disagree, but please keep the discussion open.

Disclaimer: I am not, nor is anyone in my family, either directly or indirectly employed with the energy industry.

Politics is politics and belongs in the Politics Forum. Politics is quite distinct from any other kind/type of discussion about a topic within a forum. Most frequently, passion and blind allegiance to a political position supersedes a rational and reasoned and civil discourse, which is why the political aspects of any topic should be diverted to the Politics Forum for the oft-unpleasant, heated rhetoric by opposing intransigent ideologues.

[Bunty]

Darn. Unfortunately, the Guthrie-Edmond hot spot for earthquakes is acting up again when the Oklahoma Legislature isn't yet in session.

[elitespy]

A friends chimney toppled over.

[Bellaboo]

Bellaboo,

I believe the post to be appropriately categorized as the topic of this thread is "Oklahoma Earthquake Discussion." It appears to be an open forum for all issues related to earthquakes, including but not limited to the the political issues associated with earthquakes. The thread is not limited to the geology or science of earthquakes but appears to be more broad based for general commentary.

I noticed you didn't suggest the numerous posts related to insurance coverage be moved to the Insurance thread. I'm respectfully curious if you or someone in your family is employed either directly or indirectly with the energy industry. I'm not against the energy companies, I'm simply for responsible regulation where the people are protected as much as the companies. In my opinion, we should protect those who could be harmed through no fault of their own over increased profit to a business or individual. We may disagree, but please keep the discussion open.

Energy industry or not - This is NOT the politics forum, please do not ruin this thread with a political position. Insurance coverage, why complain when we all might learn something from it ?

[PhiAlpha]

Bellaboo,

I believe the post to be appropriately categorized as the topic of this thread is "Oklahoma Earthquake Discussion." It appears to be an open forum for all issues related to earthquakes, including but not limited to the the political issues associated with earthquakes. The thread is not limited to the geology or science of earthquakes but appears to be more broad based for general commentary.

I noticed you didn't suggest the numerous posts related to insurance coverage be moved to the Insurance thread. I'm respectfully curious if you or someone in your family is employed either directly or indirectly with the energy industry. I'm not against the energy companies, I'm simply for responsible regulation where the people are protected as much as the companies. In my opinion, we should protect those who could be harmed through no fault of their own over increased profit to a business or individual. We may disagree, but please keep the discussion open.

Brownwood,

The forum below was created under the politics section for discussing the political aspects of the Earthquakes, regulations, etc. It was created when this thread got too heated and the conversation became too emotion fueled last year. That is where your original post and subsequent discussion of it should reside.

http://www.okctalk.com/politics/3831...quakes-14.html

[BobbyV]

Darn. Unfortunately, the Guthrie-Edmond hot spot for earthquakes is acting up again when the Oklahoma Legislature isn't yet in session.

Sucker woke me up this morning.

[mkjeeves]

Interesting to compare terms here. Some have masonry repairs covered, some don't, some have limits to how much they will pay on masonry repairs. (I have two very large and tall chimneys and a mix of brick veneer siding on the rest of the house. I expect the chimneys would be the first thing to go if there was much of a shake.)

https://www.ok.gov/oid/Consumers/Ins...icy_Forms.html

And then there's this. I don't think I got a notice.

Companies writing earthquake insurance in Oklahoma have reacted to the flurry of earthquakes in various ways. Some have amended their policy forms to cover damage resulting from wastewater injection. Others have simply been waiving the man-made exclusion. A third group still excludes quakes induced by wastewater injection.

Insurers providing earthquake coverage have 45 days to issue a clarifying notice to policyholders and licensed insurance agents. The notice must contain the following:

EARTHQUAKES RESULTING FROM OIL AND GAS ACTIVITIES

Subject to all policy provisions, the coverage provided by this policy (IS) or (IS NOT) intended to cover earthquake damage resulting from:

a. extracting oil or gas from below the earth’s surface by any process, including but not limited to hydraulic fracturing or drilling; or

b. injecting or inserting any substance, including but not limited to, water and wastewater, below the earth’s surface for any purpose; or

c. storage of any substance, including but not limited to, water and wastewater below the earth’s surface for any purpose; or

d. any combination of a. – c. above.

Oklahoma Insurers Required to Clarify Earthquake Coverage

To follow up on this...I found out at lunch we did get a letter from Liberty a couple of weeks ago saying, in so many words, our coverage does include damage related to oil and gas extraction, drilling, fracing, and waste water injection.

[BBatesokc]

Is everyone else feeling all these aftershocks? I've been feeling them all day.

[okatty]

Is everyone else feeling all these aftershocks? I've been feeling them all day.

I did earlier today - was just on a conf. call with a guy who said his 60 inch TV, pictures and stuff on shelves came down with the one early this morning. Lives at 122nd and Macarthur.

[chuck5815]

So, how will they prove that it wasn't natural? And if it wasn't natural, wouldn't the company who cause it have to pay out somehow?

i thought insurance coverage typically turns on whether the loss is fortuitous (your loss is covered) or non-fortuitious (your loss is not covered). if that's true, whether a loss is the product of man or nature is really immaterial to the central question of fortuity.

let's take the example of someone crashing into your vehicle. The insurer doesn't care whether the natural conditions of the road or the other driver's negligence resulted in the crash. The thing that matters is whether the crash was an accident (covered) or intentional (not-covered).

I can see how the insurers would like to paint these earthquakes as man-made, intentional acts. But I have some difficulty accepting the idea that a reasonably prudent operator would intend to induce earthquakes. The potential liability is simply too large.

[OkiePoke]

i thought insurance coverage typically turns on whether the loss is fortuitous (your loss is covered) or non-fortuitious (your loss is not covered). if that's true, whether a loss is the product of man or nature is really immaterial to the central question of fortuity.

let's take the example of someone crashing into your vehicle. The insurer doesn't care whether the natural conditions of the road or the other driver's negligence resulted in the crash. The thing that matters is whether the crash was an accident (covered) or intentional (not-covered).

I can see how the insurers would like to paint these earthquakes as man-made, intentional acts. But I have some difficulty accepting the idea that a reasonably prudent operator would intend to induce earthquakes. The potential liability is simply too large.

Well, I don't think any company wants to induce earthquakes. The insurance company wouldn't want to pay as it wasn't 'natural'.

I think the better example would be if a tree branch falls on your car, or if your neighbor cuts his tree down and it falls on your car. One is covered, the other is the liability of your neighbor. Now, most likely your insurance would cover then go after your neighbor somehow?

In regards with earthquakes, it is easier for the insurance company to go after an individual than it is to go after an O&G company. Would the insurance company go to battle for you? The mortgage company wants to protect it's investment... Would they force your insurance to pay?

Reason I ask, there are some insurance companies not wanting to cover 'man-induced' earthquakes (reasonable). But, who gets the short end of the stick? Probably the group the doesn't have a lot lawyers backing them up.

[Brownwood]

Brownwood,

The forum below was created under the politics section for discussing the political aspects of the Earthquakes, regulations, etc. It was created when this thread got too heated and the conversation became too emotion fueled last year. That is where your original post and subsequent discussion of it should reside.

http://www.okctalk.com/politics/3831...quakes-14.html

PhiAlpha,

Thank you for addressing this issue. I was unaware of the heated conversation last year and the creation of a new forum. I'm simply concerned about this issue and how it affects our community. I'll use the link in the future.

Bellaboo,

I apologize if I offended you for asking if you were affiliated with the energy industry, it seems relevant to understand someone's motivation when discussing an issue. Thanks for avoiding a direct answer.

[Filthy]

This was the strongest one I've felt. I initially thought that one of my kids had come in my bedroom and were jumping on the bed. I spent a short time this morning, walking around the house looking for any evidence or damage of said quake. I was pretty disappointed, when I found a thin (but very noticeable) hairline crack about 16 inches long in my garage. Its right at the corner of a doorway, and runs right up to the major brace that seems to support the majority of my 2nd floor. (I'm not an engineer..so, don't know the correct terminology.) But I also checked the DVR on my security cameras....and it was very noticeable. (almost comical)

[PhiAlpha]

PhiAlpha,

Thank you for addressing this issue. I was unaware of the heated conversation last year and the creation of a new forum. I'm simply concerned about this issue and how it affects our community. I'll use the link in the future.

No problem. The new thread got buried in the politics section so it was easy to miss!

[bchris02]

I've been feeling aftershocks all day. The most recent was just a few minutes ago. Did this happen after the 2011 quake?

[Bunty]

I've been feeling aftershocks all day. The most recent was just a few minutes ago. Did this happen after the 2011 quake?

Not in Stillwater. I only noticed the strongest after shock. But then some people seem more sensitive to earthquakes than others.