People who don’t insure their house

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tonight I learned that a family friend doesn’t have homeowners insurance. They own their home outright so it’s not required.
This is the first time someone know irl has disclosed this. I’m shocked. It seems like such a risky way to live.
I’m curious if anyone on here knows someone like this, or is this way themselves.

Yes, it is definately a very risky way to live. A fire, water damage, storm damage, etc is often out of your control. And could lead to total destruction, besides the land/foundation. Also, the contents of the home can be a lot. Ours is well over $350K of belongings when you include artwork, and contents.

We have homeowners for major disasters. Wouldnt' file a claim unless it was $30-50k+ of damages. But if we had that, I'd want insurance to payout

The contents of your home are not worth as much as you think they are. Perhaps to you.

I have artwork insured for over $150K, musical instruments that add another $30K+ and jewelry worth $50K+, wine over $75K+, so yes contents are well over $350K. But thanks for attempting to discuss something you know nothing about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don’t have homeowners insurance. It is priced based on average risk, plus a profit margin for the company. I am much more careful than the average person - always clean the dryer lint etc - so my house is much less likely to be damaged than the average person’s house. So it would be a net negative for me to purchase i.

You’re an idiot. Wait till a healthy tree falls over in a freak storm, which we had inspected every year. Hope you’ve got $65k for that—the amount we got from insurance. It didn’t cover the $6K we also paid to take the tree trunk down because insurance doesn’t care about that. They only covered the branch that hit the house removal.

You’re supposed have enough common sense to trim down or remove any trees that could reach your house if they happened to fall (which they do, quite often, healthy or not). I cringe any time I see a million dollar house closely surrounded by 50 foot trees. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure…Prepare for the worst, hope for the best…yadda, yadda

You aren’t able to handle the basics of homeownership, so of course you need homeowners insurance to spread the risk. PP considers what could happen, takes steps to prevent it, and is then rewarded via the risk.

Imagine a neighborhood with no trees.

Exactly! Live in the PNW where you can get into serious trouble for removing trees, even on your own property.

[Anonymous]

Spencer Pratt didn’t have insurance on his mansion then it burned down in the Palisades fire.

Now? He’s angry and running for Mayor of LA because he didn’t get a Big Government bail out.

That’s the kind of people who don’t keep insurance on their home. Risky, entitled people who expect others to make them whole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Spencer Pratt didn’t have insurance on his mansion then it burned down in the Palisades fire.

Now? He’s angry and running for Mayor of LA because he didn’t get a Big Government bail out.

That’s the kind of people who don’t keep insurance on their home. Risky, entitled people who expect others to make them whole.

Oh, really? Wow, i hadn’t heard that. Moron.

[Anonymous]

I know multiple people who can't get insurance because of the condition and/or location of their homes. It's bad in that they are high risk, but on the other hand the structures themselves are not worth that much: value is in the land. If the house burned down they could sell the bare lot and live on that money for a bit.

In theory they should be putting an amount in savings equivalent to a normal premium, but that's hard for people to do. I am financially conservative and I don't know if I have the discipline to self insure like that.