I’ve been talking to the dept. of insurance but have not yet filed a complaint. I’m hesitant to do so until I know that the insurer is actually violating some law.
The fire was not due to a disaster in a state or federal disaster area.
I finally got up the moxy to call the lender directly yesterday. They say that they will not call the loan. They will impose a policy on me that will protect them (& the condition of the property will not be an issue).
For me the downside of the non-renewal has melowed a lot. I’m still somewhat interested in seeing if my insurer can be forced to renew.
I’m also at a point where I need to find alternative coverage to cover myself.
I have a SFR property in CA that was severely damaged by a fire. The resulting insurance claim has not yet been settled. My insurance company is non-renewing my policy (and gave > 45 days notice). It will be impossible for me to have the property repaired by the time the non-renewal takes effect. I would like to have the insurer renew my policy as I am concerned that I will be unable to get a new policy on a property in this condition and that my lender will call the loan (eg. foreclose) once the property is uninsured.
I have done some reasearch and determined that many lenders (including the CA Fair plan) will not insure a damaged property.
There is a California law (ab2962) which may be relevant to my situation which would prevent them from non-renewing if the loss was a ‘total loss’. I am hoping that this law will apply to my case, but I’m not sure what the law considers a ‘total loss’.
I have a couple questions:
Is there a way that I can insure and severely damaged property such that the lender will protected and be unable to call the loan? (Perhaps a course of construction loan?)
Can I force the insurer to renew my policy? How do I determine if the damage constituted a ‘total loss’ - especially considering that my claim has not yet settled.
Does anyone have recomendations for CA Attroneys who deal with Home insurance?