The comment stream
Recent comments
- 1 of 20720
- ››
Editors choice
- 1 of 294
- ››
The news stream
Latest news
Most commented
- Record exodus to Australia in last year 70
- 'Don't sell SOE shares; Borrow from Kiwis' 37
- 'Councils should look at asset sales' 34
- 90 seconds at 9 am: No G8 deal 20
- NZ to borrow more if crisis worsens-Key 19
- Beware of the creeping taxman 19
- Thousands get lower rates; what now? 16
- Monday's Top 10 with NZ Mint 12
- Euro-mess won't change Key on Super 8
- Pastoral Dairy Investments cans public offer 7
Most viewed
Am I covered? - A guide to how earthquake insurance cover works

By John Grant
The size of the damage bill from the Canterbury earthquake will take weeks if not months to be understood.
It impacts both the private and commercial sectors - houses, contents and personal property, commercial buildings, damage to stock, business interruption and the damage to public infrastructure, roads, bridges, retaining walls, water supplies, power and sewage.
The end result will be a figure that will no doubt surprise many. Current estimates of between $1.5 and $2 billion are likely to be revised upwards as more detailed investigations reveal the true extent of the damage.
The government's Earthquake Commission (EQC) was established in 1945 to provide earthquake and war damage cover for purchasers of fire insurance. Later, cover for other natural disasters was included and, later still, cover for war damage dropped. The modern EQC is a Government-owned Crown Entity.
Cover is now capped at maximum claim amounts.
To obtain EQC insurance you must hold a current fire insurance policy on the property with a private insurer.
The private insurer is required to collect a premium on behalf of the EQC. You pay 5c for every $100 of cover plus GST. As the cover is limited to $100,000 (plus GST) for houses and $20,000 plus GST for contents this means most people pay $67.50 per annum as part of their House and Contents insurance.
Related Topics
In addition to the limited EQC cover, private insurers provide cover beyond the EQC cover to the limit of the cover you have on your house and contents policies.
In most cases these days houses are insured for replacement cover to a physical size of the property. This means a property of 300 sq metres is insured for the cost to replace a 300sq m property.
The benefits of this type of cover will now become very apparent as costs are bound to escalate due to scarcity of material and the labour to rebuild.
Therefore if your loss is of a minor nature then you will probably be dealing with the EQC.
However larger residential losses that will exceed the $100,000 cap will require a coordinated role between your private insurer and EQC. In these cases your insurer will be your primary point of contact and they will liaise with EQC.
EQC only cover physical damage to your property. Therefore if the house is not habitable then you will need to claim for temporary accommodation costs from your insurer.
All claims for non residential losses will need to be made to your private insurer.
Claims for damage to commercial buildings will be substantial. However the largest cost is likely to be for business interruption claims. This is where an insurer will cover loss of profits from the inability to trade. It also provides cover for reduced profits due to damage or restricted access through an event such as this earthquake.
Uninsured and under insured problems
The difficulty will come from those who are either not insured or underinsured. The size and extent of this problem will become increasingly apparent in coming weeks.
In previous large disasters, it has been found that one third of people impacted are uninsured, a further third are underinsured, while the remaining third have adequate cover.
Those who do not hold a house or contents cover and have suffered loss or damage to their house or contents are not insured by the Earthquake Commission.
28 Comments
1/3rd uninsured?? How can
1/3rd uninsured?? How can people pour a hard-earned deposit worth at least 10s of thousands of $$$ in a house and then not get any cover at all? That's nuts. If someone has the cash to buy a home, surely they have 100$/month or so to spare to cover what's probably the most expensive thing they'll ever buy? That said, lots of people seem to think it's OK not to insure their car so maybe they feel the same about houses. Still, I hope it's a much smaller proportion that didn't have any insurance.
Elley - I totally agree but
Elley - I totally agree but JK has said that Cabinet will need to address this issue, which means the taxpayer will bailout the uninsured.
I had heard ite 1/3rd
I had heard ite 1/3rd un-insured......bear in mind some ppl actually earn little so a premium is a big cost to them....that $70 a month is quite a bit of food or heating....if I was really broke insurance is what I would cut.
Not even $100 a month....house and contents probably $60 maybe $70 a month...For contents I do wonder if its that valuable....I keep an eye on that each year and do a quick stock take...
regards
I agree that it may be a big
I agree that it may be a big cost to some people but those people probably can't afford to or shouldn't be buying a house in the first place in that case, let alone take a mortgage to have the bank buy it for them. It's not like earthquakes or just fires never happened.
SCF Syndrome: Taxpayer
SCF Syndrome: Taxpayer bail-outs for all!
In case anyone has relatives,
In case anyone has relatives, friends etc. in Christchurch I would like to use this forum to advise that Open2view, via our Christchurch Open2view franchisees, is offering free property photography for insurance assessment purposes in Christchurch.
Contact is Jamie Armstrong who is co-ordinating this initiative.
jamie.armstrong@open2view.com
Mobile: 027 220 2559
I am staggered that 1/3 of
I am staggered that 1/3 of folk would have no house insurance.
If that is true, and such folk will not get anything back for the damage to their homes (according to the above) then it is hard to see how the effects of the quake can be anything other than detrimental to the region - in effect the value of hundreds of millions of damaged assets/property will have been taken out of the economy.
Which raises the
Which raises the question...are we in need of compulsory property insurance as part of rates with companies tendering for the premiums on offer.....clearly there will be characters who, due to their past are not deemed to be insurable...in which case their premium goes to a govt fund. It seems bloody daft to allow one third not to have cover in a country that is always at risk of either the shakes or a flood. Cabinet need to look at this matter....NOW.
Surely any house bought with
Surely any house bought with a mortgage has to have insurance?
My understanding is when you
My understanding is when you do not pay your insurance on a mortgaged house, it is paid automatically and added to your mortgage?
I doubt it. Otherwise why
I doubt it. Otherwise why would any of us do our own 'redundant' insurance? It depends on what you negotiated in your mortgage , I guess.
When I first took out my
When I first took out my mortgage, I had to send confirmation of insurance to the lender. However, if I now cancelled my home insurance policy, I doubt that my lender has a means of detecting this, and forcing me to take out a new policy.
Yes we can.
Yes we can.
...or maybe some of these
...or maybe some of these uninsured people are mortgage free!
Maybe the bank or financial
Maybe the bank or financial institution that financed the mortgage will have some sort of mortgage insurance over the loan amount.
They may. But that protects
They may. But that protects the Bank/Lender from default by the borrower. The bank gets paid out, and then the insurance company comes looking for its money back....from the borrower.
Here's super lupine idea for
Here's super lupine idea for a new house and contents policy.
If the government does pay out those who decided not to have insurance, it is evidence that in the case of major disasters the government will dip into the taxpayer purse to help out the less responsible amongst us.
So, the Wolfpack Beggar-Your-Neighbour House and Contents Policy would exclude any claims in the event that the government paid out those with no insurance leaving you free to tap the government...
Lower premiums, natch...bound to be popular
Seems only fair, don't you think, my fellow furry ones....
Well i'm one of the "un
Well i'm one of the "un insured" only due to changing cover from state to AMI, so for the past 19 years in which I have owned a property and paid insurance.... Am I left out to suffer?
And yes my property is very ... beat up, moved off its foundations, cracked walls, doors dont close and sunk ny atleast an inch, so.... will I be looked after or, as said above, left out to suffer?
Sorry to hear of
Sorry to hear of that.
In changing cover did you not set it to roll over at a set date and time to your new provider.
Or have you let the State policy lapse and were getting around to get cover with AMI and the earthquake struck?
Insurance payments are only for the period of insurance in question. Length of time will only give you a discount on premium and not an expectation of cover.
Based on what you said - you would have no cover.
Certainly the quake has made me drag out our policy documents, and with a house move in the next couple of weeks, want cover from takeover date/time.
Also EQC ALSO covers you for landslides, drainage issues as well.
dbl post shocker again
dbl post shocker again
ChCh dude, I am also sorry to
ChCh dude, I am also sorry to hear that your house has been damaged. But there is no reason to be uninsured while changing insurance company. You just arrange for the old company's cover to end on the same day that the new company's cover begins.
Also, the fact that you've paid insurance premiums in the past is irrelevant. The insurance covers you only during the period that you are paying it. It's not like an investment in which you build up a fund.
I suspect that the government will help you out in some way - perhaps by providing an interest-free loan for your home repairs, or by paying for the repairs in exchange for the rights to a proportion of your home.
Sorry to hear your house was
Sorry to hear your house was damaged. Not sure why you didn't arrange for a proper takeover with the new insurance. When we moved in February, we got cover for the new place 1 week before handover from the builders. Same with my life insurance, made sure to receive the documents before cancelling the policy with another company.
Although technically you're not covered I doubt you won't get something from the govt. I certainly hope you will anyway. Seeing that investors and anyone else who chose to take risks get bailed out, it'd be a shame to leave people who've lost everything in a natural disaster not get anything (it does make me wonder why we bother making sure our family is covered though).
Yet another crap night down here. A number of big jolts again, 2 big ones and at least one of those lasted for long enough to be scary. So tired to be on alert all the time and spend half the night reassuring the kids.
Insurance has to go the same
Insurance has to go the same way seatbelts and bike helmets went. Too many are too stupid or too lazy to think but bloody quick to demand munny when it hits the fan.
Hopefully the Cabinet will see past the stupid policies of earlier govts and make property cover a part of council rates.
And NO............. we do not need another bloody working group!
So How does the insurance
So How does the insurance work then? Our house in Auckland has damaged foundations - sunk 2 inches in one corner, which seem to be due to the Councils blocked strorm drains in the rear of the section - burried manhole not on the plans - broken pipes feeding the manhole chamber, filled with tree roots, and burried drainage pits. The other Council storm water pipe at the front of the section is also blocked with tree roots = no drainage for our spouting for the past ?? years. The AMI insurance said foundations were not covered, The Earth Quake commision didnt want to know, said it wasnt a Earthquake, and the slope wasnt enough to claim for a slip, so now we are left to battle it out with the Council. We bought the house 3 years ago, and had a building inspection before we bought it - read the small print they are not liable for any comeback. So its now been sinking in the corner for the past year. So how exactly does the House insurance work in New Zealand? Because from wher I am sitting I am paying insurance and cannot claim for my house foundations sinking, and from the insurance I pay a levy to the EQC.
It is the councils
It is the councils responsibility I suspect...though i would wonder if your insurnace pays for damage but not the cause......it maybe time you got a lawyer...
regards.
I assumed EQC has been
I assumed EQC has been salting the profits of premiums away, investing it wisely, ready for an earthquake.
But now that we've had such an earthquake and EQC (eventually) pays out to those affected they want to increase the premiums? What? Isn't this exactly what we were all insuring ourselves for and paying premiums for all these years?
What's happened to all EQC's profits during 'lean payout' years?
Brian
uh....a somewhat strange
uh....a somewhat strange comment,
the EQC doesnt make a profit.....its all fed back into its piggy bank.
So four reasons,
1) Its now depleted due to the chch payouts so it has to recover its capital.
2) That also means given the size of the chch payout its capital base was too small.
3) It re-insured some of that risk, those premiums if my premium is anything to go by have gone up 200%+...
4) Its highly likely that NZ might find it cant get re-insurance in the future so we will have to self-fund.....that means a way bigger fund is needed.
Is this straighforward enough for you to understand?
regards
Then tell me about this piggy
Then tell me about this piggy bank.