Do insurance policy still exclude "Acts of god?"

1. 80

   earnestshubposted 14 years ago

   Have insurance companies dropped this clause, or is it still considered that "god" damaged your property?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      SirDentposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      LOL, this is a good question. I am not sure if they still use that phrase or not. I may have to look and find out.

      replyreport
2. 59

   Ohmaposted 14 years ago

   Well I am not an agent but when I worked gor the Restoration Company about 10 years ago "Acts of God" where not covered by most insurance companies.

   replyreport
3. 0

   SirDentposted 14 years ago

   I think a better question might be, what would be considered an act of God?

   replyreport
4. 59

   Ohmaposted 14 years ago

   "Acts of God" were at least then defined as natural disasters. Tornado, Hurricane, flood, that kind of stuff. It is the reason most insurance companies offer special riders to cover these things, especially if you live in an area that is prone to such events like Tornado Alley in the Mid-west or The Mississippi Flood Plain.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      SirDentposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      A good enough lawyer could say that everyhting, no matter what happened, is an act of God. He/she could make a good argument to support their case.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Ohmaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Agreed. I think that it is really just like any other ploy to embezel money from the poor working stiffs of the world. It is really sad that I have seen the Act of God clause applied to water damaged structures because the roof leaked when it rained. This is not an Act of God it is a structural fault but I have seen insurance companies get away with it.

         replyreport
5. 80

   earnestshubposted 14 years ago

   We just had a lot of insurance claims for bushfires in our state.
   I just heard a non-believer on the radio say that if this clause applies to is property he is going to challenge the insurance company to prove there is a god. Should be interesting if they do apply this clause. I wonder if a good lawyer can prove that?

   replyreport
6. 59

   Ohmaposted 14 years ago

   while that is an interesting approach I think he will not win. As you know I am more agnostic than anything else and I will not enter into the is there or isn't there a god discussion, but the belief in god has survived for so long that I think he would be hard put to challenge it in a court room.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I am inclined to agree. He may have a loss on that one. I would have a go though.
      Religiosity as a sub-conscious process perhaps, citing Jung et al?

      replyreport
7. 59

   Ohmaposted 14 years ago

   WOW! Sorry to go off topic a little here but this has got to be a first. I agree with Sir Dent and Earnest agrees with me! does that mean that there might be a little room for the two of you to come closer together on your so adamant beliefs about religion?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      SirDentposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I had to put timbers up in my house to keep the roof from caving in on me.

      replyreport
      1. 80

         earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
         1. 0

            SirDentposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I am going to bed now. I sent you an email Earnest. Good night.

            replyreport
            1. 80

               earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Goodnight SirDent. Sleep well.

               replyreport
8. 59

   Ohmaposted 14 years ago

   replyreport
9. 59

   Ohmaposted 14 years ago

   Good Nigt SirDent!

   replyreport