[TowerTalk] Insurance for Tower

Cqtestk4xs at aol.com Cqtestk4xs at aol.com
Fri Nov 29 10:53:16 EST 2013

Although I may be covered with my homeowners policy, I will not  ever make 
a claim for any damage to my antennas.  I have Marsh for any  damage that 
may result to them from wind etc.  I have a bunch of antennas  and I sleep 
well at night knowing that for a little over a dollar a day they're  all 
covered AND I'll never have to submit a claim to my homeowners insurance for  them 
which almost certainly result in cancellation.  Besides, in FL, we  have a 
2% deductable of home value that kicks in for named storms before we get  a 
dime from them.  So my claim for anything under $6000 draws a flag and  not 
a dime from the insurance company.  Gee, what a great  deal!
Bill K4XS
In a message dated 11/28/2013 5:15:33 P.M. Coordinated Universal Tim,  
krgoodwin at comcast.net writes:

Jim has  hit the nail on the head.  Another area that all of the  major
insurance carriers departed from after Hurricane Ike was the Texas  coast
(one mile from any body of water was the State Farm cancellation  policy).  
wouldn't file a claim today unless the entire house was  damaged so
essentially I am only insured against a total loss.  Even  then if you read
the details of an insurance policy, the claim rules change  significantly.
Most of these changes (e.g., change in the deductible for  peril against a
named storm) are beginning to be clearly spelled out in the  policy.  So to
file a claim for just a tower is an invitation to  cancellation and with a
recent claim on record (publically available data),  you will find out what
expensive insurance really means.  I would  highly suggest the ARRL 
insurance.  It is a marine policy,  no questions asked, solely based on the
insured value in dollars and you  can specifically pick what you want
insured.  Again recent claims may  result in a denial from the ARRL
subcontracted insurance company.   Personally I can't wait until all of this
hits New Jersey/New York and I  can listen to them scream and cry foul.
Obviously they were not paying  attention to the Katrina, Ike and Florida
insurance policy holders.   Ken K5RG

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 28  Nov 2013 07:15:29 -0800
From: Jim Lux <jimlux at earthlink.net>
To:  towertalk at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Insurance for  Tower

On aspect, not specific to Kimo's anecdote, is that  experience with
insurance companies before 2007 may not be relevant  today.

The market and banking system anomalies hit insurance companies  hard. 
In school you learn about the idealized scheme where the sum of all  the
premiums collected from all policy is slightly more than the sum of all  the
loss payouts for the year.

However, in reality, what happens is  that the money that is paid in, and 
yet used to settle claims, is  invested in various speculative instruments
ranging from T-bills/T-bonds to  Credit Default Swaps and other exotic
investments.  In "good times"  the profits from these investments allows the
insurance company to charge  lower premiums for a given loss experience 
they only need to collect  enough that 
premiums+investment profits is > loss payouts).

AIG,  for instance, was making money hand over fist by taking the counter
side to  mortgage defaults: e.g. they were betting that the mortgages
wouldn't  default, and they could collect premiums and never payout. 
This allowed  them to offer very competitive rates in their other lines  of
business.  OOps, that didn't work so well when the laws of  probability went
against them.

So, now, insurance companies in  general have to charge higher premiums: 
the investment income isn't there,  the loss payouts are still there, so
premiums have to go up.  Or, they  can manage the future loss payouts.

And the latter is being manifested  in a variety of ways:
Here in Southern California, it is becoming VERY hard  to get new policies
written on existing houses, because large swathes of  subdivisions are now
deemed "high fire risk"; essentially you draw a  boundary some X hundred 
from the boundary to undeveloped land, an  everything in there is in the
hazard zone.  Whether they are or aren't  in real life is irrelevant  (There
are lots of cases where the concern  is legitimate.. urban/wildland 
is a big problem).  The  problem is that anything that triggers a
re-evaluation is a potential cause  for your insurance going away.

I think this is similar to the problem  in Florida with hurricanes.  The big
players have decided it's not  worth it to insure houses in FL any  more.


TowerTalk  mailing  list
TowerTalk at contesting.com

More information about the TowerTalk mailing list