Category Archives: Earthquakes

Catastrophes, Coastal Property, Disaster Preparedness, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes, Floods, Homeowners Insurance, Hurricane, Lightning, Regulation, Risk Management, Severe Convective Storm, Tornado, Wildfire, Wind

Some Weather Service Jobs Being Restored;
BRIC Still Being Litigated

Leave a comment

Amid a summer full of deadly fires and storm-related flooding, the Trump Administration appears to be rolling back some of the spending cuts imposed upon the National Weather Service (NWS) by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – of which NWS is a part – announced at an internal all-hands meeting earlier this month that they will hire 450 meteorologists, hydrologists, and radar technicians. CNN reported the announcement, citing an unnamed NOAA official. In jointly timed press releases, Congressmen Mike Flood and Eric Sorensen (D-Ill.) and Mike Flood (R-Neb.) acknowledged the planned hirings.

While the decision is welcome news, both congressmen continued to urge their colleagues to pass their bipartisan Weather Workforce Improvement Act to ensure these positions will remain permanent and not be subject to any future reductions. 

“For months, Congressman Flood and I have been fighting to get NOAA and NWS employees the support they need in the face of cuts to staff and funding,” Sorenson said. “Hundreds of unfilled positions have caused NWS offices across the country to cancel weather balloon launches, forgo overnight staffing, and force remaining meteorologists to overwork themselves.”

“For decades the National Weather Service has helped keep our communities safe with accurate and timely forecasts,” said Flood, adding that the NOAA announcement “sends a message that they’re focused on strengthening the NWS for years to come.”  

NOAA and FEMA cuts raised fears

It’s not just the NOAA and NWS cuts that have raised concerns. On April 4, 2025, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) announced that it would be ending its Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program and cancel all BRIC applications from fiscal years 2020-2023. Congress established BRIC through the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 to ensure a stable funding source to support mitigation projects annually. The program has allocated more than $5 billion for investment in mitigation projects to alleviate human suffering and avoid economic losses from floods, wildfires, and other disasters.

At the time, Chad Berginnis, executive director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM), called the decision to terminate BRIC “beyond reckless.”

 “Although ASFPM has had some qualms about how FEMA’s BRIC program was implemented, it was still a cornerstone of our nation’s hazard mitigation strategy, and the agency has worked to make improvements each year,” Berginnis said. “Eliminating it entirely — mid-award cycle, no less — defies common sense.”

Resilience investment is key to long-term insurance availability and affordability.  Average insured catastrophe losses have been on the rise for decades, reflecting a combination of climate-related factors and demographic trends as more people have moved into harm’s way.

Efforts have been made to save BRIC, and a U.S. District Judge in Boston recently granted a preliminary injunction sought by 20 Democrat-led states while their lawsuit over the funding moves ahead. Judge Richard G. Stearns ruled the Trump Administration cannot reallocate $4 billion meant to help communities protect against natural disasters.

In his ruling, Stearns said he was not convinced Congress had given FEMA any discretion to redirect the funds. The states had also shown that the “balance of hardship and public interest” was in their favor.

“There is an inherent public interest in ensuring that the government follows the law, and the potential hardship accruing to the States from the funds being repurposed is great,” Stearns wrote. “The BRIC program is designed to protect against natural disasters and save lives.”

Learn More

2025 Cat Losses to Date Are 2nd-Costliest Since Records Have Been Kept

Russia Quake Highlights Unpredictability of Natural Catastrophes

JIF 2025: Federal Cuts Imperil Resilience Efforts

Louisiana Senator Seeks Resumption of Resilience Investment Program

Texas: A Microcosm of U.S. Climate Perils

BRIC Funding Loss Underscores Need for Collective Action on Climate Resilience

Weather Balloons’ Role in Readiness, Resilience

ClimateTech Connect Confronts Climate Peril From Washington Stage

Catastrophes, Coastal Property, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes, Floods, Homeowners Insurance, Hurricane, Lightning, Severe Convective Storm, Wildfire

2025 Cat Losses to Date
Are 2nd-Costliest Since Records Have Been Kept

Leave a comment

Global insured losses from natural catastrophes reached $80 billion in the first six months of 2025 alone, making it the second-costliest first half on record since data collection began decades ago, according to reports by reinsurance giants Munich Re and Swiss Re.

Both reports called out the devastating wildfires that swept through Los Angeles County in January as the single most destructive event to date, with both firms estimating that these fires caused $40 billion in insured losses.

What makes these disasters particularly alarming is their timing and location. Both reports emphasized that the Los Angeles fires occurred during California’s normally wet winter season, when such massive blazes are typically unheard of. This seasonal shift represents a troubling new pattern, in which dangerous fire conditions persist year-round, rather than just during traditional fire season.

The reports also agree that severe thunderstorms across the American Midwest and South continued to cause billions in additional damage throughout spring, reinforcing how weather-related disasters are becoming both more frequent and more costly as communities expand into high-risk areas.

Swiss Re and Munich Re both identify the same underlying drivers making these disasters so expensive: More people are building homes and businesses in dangerous areas like wildfire-prone zones and tornado alleys, while climate change is making extreme weather events more intense and unpredictable.

The reports agree that this combination of increased development in risky locations and worsening weather conditions means that what happened in the first half of 2025 is likely just a preview of even costlier disasters to come, unless communities take serious steps to build more resilient infrastructure and avoid construction in the most hazardous areas.

Cat losses and replacement costs

Swiss Re emphasized the growing wildfire threat, pointing out that, before 2015, wildfires on average contributed around 1 percent of the total insured losses from all natural catastrophes worldwide.

“In the last 10 years, this has risen to 7 percent, the costliest periods being a two-year stretch of 2017‒18, and to a lesser extent 2020,” the report said.

Swiss Re also points to severe impact of post-pandemic construction cost inflation, noting that “construction costs rose by 35.64 percent from January 2020 to June 2025, directly impacting property claims costs.”  These higher costs to repair and replace property significantly increase the financial impact of each disaster.

“The best way to avoid losses is to implement effective preventive measures, such as more robust construction for buildings and infrastructure to better withstand natural disasters,” said Thomas Blunck, a member of Munich Re’s Board of Management. “Such precautions can help to maintain reasonable insurance premiums, even in high-risk areas. And most importantly: to reduce future exposure, new building development should not be allowed in high-risk areas.”

Swiss Re cautions that climate change is creating more volatile and unpredictable loss patterns, making catastrophe losses “more difficult to predict.” Together, these trends suggest the U.S. insurance market must prepare for sustained pressure on pricing and availability, particularly in high-risk coastal and wildland-urban interface regions.

Learn More:

Russia Quake Highlights Unpredictability of Natural Catastrophes

Texas: A Microcosm of U.S. Climate Perils

Triple-I Brief Highlights Wildfire Risk Complexity

BRIC Funding Loss Underscores Need for Collective Action on Climate Resilience

P&C Insurance Achieves Best Results Since 2013; Wildfire Losses, Tariffs Threaten 2025 Prospects

Data Granularity Key to Finding Less Risky Parcels in Wildfire Areas

California Finalizes Updated Modeling Rules, Clarifies Applicability Beyond Wildfire

2025 Tornadoes Highlight Convective Storm Losses

Severe Convective Storm Risks Reshape U.S. Property Insurance Market

Modern Building Codes Would Prevent Billions in Catastrophe Losses

Disaster Preparedness, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes

Russia Quake Highlights Unpredictability of Natural Catastrophes

Leave a comment

Yesterday’s 8.8 magnitude earthquake near Russia’s Kamchatka Peninsula sent tsunami waves across the Pacific, placing Hawaii under evacuation orders, triggering advisories along the U.S. West Coast, and emphasizing a critical truth about natural catastrophes: They don’t respect borders and tend not to give warnings.

While the immediate impacts were relatively contained—with waves reaching up to 4 meters in Russia’s coastal towns and smaller surges affecting Japan, Hawaii, and Alaska—the event offers a potent and timely reminder about the importance of preparation and investment in resilience.

Coverage Confusion That Could Cost

Standard homeowners insurance policies don’t cover tsunami damage. Neither do earthquake policies, despite the seismic trigger. Tsunami damage falls under flood coverage—a separate policy that many coastal property owners don’t carry.

Flood insurance purchase rates nationally are low – even in coastal communities. This creates a potential perfect storm of financial vulnerability. Communities that experienced evacuation orders yesterday, from Oahu to the Oregon coast might well have been saddled with massive, largely uninsured losses had the tsunami played out differently.

Low Frequency, High Consequence

Tsunami risk represents the most challenging category of natural disasters: extremely rare but potentially catastrophic. Unlike hurricanes or earthquakes that occur with some regularity, major tsunamis affecting U.S. coastlines are generational events. This rarity can breed complacency.

Yesterday’s event, while not causing major damage to U.S. properties, provided invaluable data for catastrophe modelers. The wave propagation patterns, arrival times, and coastal impacts across Hawaii, Alaska, and the West Coast offer fresh insights into how a more severe event might unfold. Insurers and reinsurers are likely already incorporating this data into their risk models.

Building Resilience Through Partnership

The beauty of a “predict and prevent” model of risk management is that it can address a multiplicity of perils. While tsunamis are rare, flooding is not. Recent years have witnessed a rise in inland flooding related to tropical storms, atmospheric rivers, and severe convective storms. The communities affected by catastrophic flood events like the recent ones in Texas and New Mexico and the devastating 2024 floods related to Hurricane Helene tend to have even lower flood insurance “take-up” rates than coastal communities.

The most effective risk management will require unprecedented collaboration between public and private sectors. The NFIP, state insurance departments, and private insurers need to work together on pricing models that accurately reflect risk while remaining accessible to coastal communities. At the same time, communities and businesses must plan and invest together to prepare not just one but many potential climate-related risks.

Learn More:

N.J. Quake a Wake-Up Call for Seismic Mitigation, Resilience Investment

Earthquakes:You Can’t Predict Them, But You Can Prepare

Dear California:As You Prep for Wildfire, Don’t Neglect Quake Risk

JIF 2025: Federal Cuts Imperil Resilience Efforts

BRIC Funding Loss Underscores Need for Collective Action on Climate Resilience

Louisiana Senator Seeks Resumption of Resilience Investment Program

Triple-I Brief Highlights Rising Inland Flood Risk

Hurricane Helene Highlights Inland Flood Protection Gap

Removing Incentives for Development From High-Risk Areas Boosts Flood Resilience

Executive Exchange: Using Advanced Tools to Drill Into Flood Risk

Accurately Writing Flood Coverage Hinges on Diverse Data Sources

Accurately Writing Flood Coverage Hinges on Diverse Data Sources

Disaster Preparedness, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes

N.J. Quake a Wake-Up Call for Seismic Mitigation, Resilience Investment

Leave a comment
Residents and police gather outside of homes in Newark, N.J., that were damaged by a 4.8 magnitude earthquake on April 5. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Last week’s earthquake in Lebanon, N.J.  –  the strongest to hit the state in more than 200 years and which halted activity in New York-area airports and was felt from Washington, D.C., to Maine – highlighted the importance of earthquake preparedness, mitigation, and insurance in areas traditionally not associated with damaging seismic activity.

Earthquake insurance is not covered under a standard homeowners policy. According to A.M. Best, $250 million in direct premiums written for earthquake coverage was in force in Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York in 2023, accounting for less than 5 percent of U.S. earthquake coverage premiums.

Claims from last week’s event are not expected to be excessive.

“Insurers may be anticipating small claims from owners of businesses,” said Janet Ruiz, Triple-I director of strategic communication. “For example, grocery stores, where glass bottles may have fallen from shelves. But the insurance impact is likely to be limited.”

The most significant impact occurred in Newark, N.J., where three multifamily row homes were declared uninhabitable because of potential structural damage, displacing dozens of residents. However, on Saturday morning, the properties were declared structurally safe and residents were allowed to return.

Earthquakes large enough to be felt by a lot of people are relatively uncommon on the East Coast. Since 1950 there have been about 20 quakes with a magnitude above 4.5, according to the United States Geological Survey. That’s compared with over 1,000 on the West Coast.

In 2011, a 5.8 magnitude quake near Mineral, Va., shook East Coast residents over a wide swath from Georgia to Maine and even southeastern Canada. The USGS called it one of the most widely felt quakes in North American history. The quake cost $200 to $300 million in property damages, including to the Washington Monument in D.C., much of it uninsured.

Just as floods can inflict damage in areas not designated by FEMA as “flood zones,” any property where a quake can happen can undergo significant damage. Unlike in earthquake-prone states like California, however, structures typically are not designed or built with seismic events in mind. Homeowners would be well advised to discuss with their insurance professionals whether earthquake coverage is right for them.

Last week’s temblor also should drive awareness of the need for Congress to reauthorize the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) – a federal program that helps mitigate earthquake damage to buildings and communities. The NEHRP expired in September 2023. Bipartisan legislation to reauthorize the program was introduced in January 2024.

“I’ve seen what happens when communities aren’t prepared and haven’t mitigated,” said Dr. Lucy Arendt, a professor with St. Norbert College and Chair of the NEHRP Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction, in a March 7 congressional briefing hosted by the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS). “People are displaced from their homes. Schools are closed. Businesses shutter. There’s a lot of trauma.”

Arendt said investment in knowledge, time, and money prior to a severe disaster is significantly less than the cost to help communities recover from a major threat.

“There is a resilience gap between where we are today and where we should be as a resilient nation,” said Daniel Kaniewski, a former FEMA deputy administrator and member of the NIBS Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council. “I saw firsthand the collapse of infrastructure. These are things you might not see because it’s buried underground. But without water and power, that community cannot recover. Lifeline infrastructure needs to be restored quickly and efficiently.”

Most of the built environment is not designed to withstand earthquakes. Communities with weak building codes, older housing stock, unreinforced masonry buildings, and unmitigated hazards will fare worse than others, Kaniewski said.

“This, combined with the potential severe human toll, means that any U.S. earthquake could have catastrophic consequences that would reverberate well beyond the impact zone,” he added. “Damage to manufacturing facilities, transportation nodes, and communications networks and disrupted supply chains would be among the long list of cascading failures. Massive government spending would be necessary” to repair in the aftermath of such an event.

Learn More:

Triple-I Backgrounder on Earthquake Risk

Triple-I Facts & Statistics: Earthquakes and Tsunamis

Earthquakes: You Can’t Predict Them, But You Can Prepare

California Earthquakes: How Modern Building Codes Are Making Safer, More Resilient Communities

Auto Insurance, Catastrophes, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes, Floods, Homeowners Insurance, Industry Financials, Insurers and the Economy

Calif. Risk/Regulatory Environment Highlights Role of Risk-Based Pricing

Leave a comment

Even as California moves to address regulatory obstacles to fair, actuarially sound insurance underwriting and pricing, the state’s risk profile continues to evolve in ways that underscore the importance of risk-based insurance pricing and investment in mitigation and resilience.

Triple-I’s latest “State of the Risk” Issues Brief discusses this changing risk environment and the impact of Proposition 103 – a three-decades-old measure that has made it hard for insurers to profitably write coverage in the state. In a dynamically evolving risk environment that includes earthquakes, drought, wildfire, landslides, and — in recent years, due to “atmospheric rivers” — damaging floods, Proposition 103 has prevented insurers from using the most current data and advanced modeling technologies. Instead, it has required them to price coverage based on historical data alone.

It also has restricted accurate underwriting and pricing by not allowing insurers to incorporate the cost of reinsurance into their pricing. Insurers use reinsurance to maximize their capacity to write coverage, and reinsurance rates have been rising for many of the same reasons as primary insurance rates. If insurers can’t reflect reinsurance costs in their pricing – particularly in catastrophe-prone areas – they must pay for these costs from policyholder surplus, reduce their market share in the state, or do both.

Proposition 103 also has impeded premium rate changes by allowing consumer advocacy groups to intervene in the rate-approval process. This makes it hard to respond quickly to changing market conditions, resulting in approval delays and rates that don’t accurately reflect current (let alone future) risk. It also drives up legal and administrative costs.

This has led, in some cases, to insurers deciding to limit or reduce their business in the state. With fewer private insurance options available, more Californians are resorting to the state’s FAIR Plan, which offers less coverage for a higher premium.

This isn’t a tenable situation.

In September 2023, California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara announced a Sustainable Insurance Strategy for the state that includes allowing insurers to use forward-looking risk models that prioritize wildfire safety and mitigation and include reinsurance costs into their premium pricing. In exchange, insurers must cover homeowners in wildfire-prone parts of the state at 85 percent of their statewide coverage.

Issues around property insurance affordability are not confined to California. They’ve been a long time in the making, and they won’t be resolved overnight.

“Any sustainable solutions will have to rest on actuarially sound underwriting and pricing principles,” the Triple-I brief says. “Unfortunately, too often, the public discourse frames the risk crisis as an `insurance crisis’ – conflating cause with effect. Legislators, spurred by calls from their constituents for lower insurance premiums, often propose measures that would tend to worsen the problem because these proposals generally fail to reflect the importance of accurately valuing risk when pricing coverage.”

California’s Proposition 103 and the federal flood insurance program prior to its Risk Rating 2.0 reforms are just two examples, according to Triple-I.

Learn More:

Triple-I Issues Brief: Wildfire

Triple-I Issues Brief: Flood

Triple-I Issues Brief: Risk-Based Pricing of Insurance

How Proposition 103 Worsens Risk Crisis in California

Is California Serious About Wildfire Risk?

Dear California: As You Prep for Wildfire, Don’t Neglect Quake Risk

Catastrophes, Disaster Preparedness, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes, Emerging Risks, ESG, Flood Insurance, Floods, Insurers and the Economy, Legal Environment, Regulation, Risk Management

Triple-I Town Hall Amplified Calls
to Attack Climate Risk

Leave a comment

By Jeff Dunsavage, Senior Research Analyst, Triple-I

I’m pleased and proud to have been part of Triple-I’s Town Hall — “Attacking the Risk Crisis” — in Washington, D.C. In an intimate setting at the Mayflower Hotel on November 30, 120-plus attendees got to hear from experts representing insurance, government, academia, nonprofits, and other stakeholder groups on climate risk, what’s being done to address it, and what remains to be done.  

Triple-I’s first-ever Town Hall was designed as a logical step in its multi-disciplinary, action-oriented effort to change behavior to drive resilience. Capping a year in which headlines about “insurance crises” in several states garnered major media attention, Triple-I and its members and partners recognized the need for clarification.

“What we’re seeing is not an ‘insurance crisis’,” Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan told the standing-room-only audience. “We’re in the midst of a risk crisis. Rising insurance premium rates and availability difficulties are not the cause but a symptom of this crisis.”

Whisker Labs CEO Bob Marshall discusses innovation with moderator Jennifer Kyung, Vice President and Chief Underwriter at USAA.

While the insurance industry has a critical role to play and is uniquely well equipped to lead the attack, simply transferring risk is not enough. A recurring theme at the Town Hall was the need to shift from a focus on assessing and repairing damage to one of predicting and preventing losses.

Three moderated discussions – examining the nature of climate risk and its costs; highlighting the need of strategic innovation in mitigating those risks and building resilience; and exploring the role and impact of government policy – gave panelists the opportunity to share their insights with a diverse audience focused on collaborative action.

The agenda was:

Climate Risk Is Spiraling: What Can Be Done?

Moderator: David Wessel, Senior Fellow and Director at the Brookings Institution and former Economics Editor for The Wall Street Journal.

Panelists:

Dr. Philip Klotzbach, Colorado State University, researcher and Triple-I non-resident scholar.

Dan Kaniewski, Managing Director, Public Sector at Marsh McLennan, Former FEMA Deputy Administrator.

Jacqueline Higgins, Head, North America & Senior Vice President, Public Sector Solutions, Swiss Re

Jim Boccher, Chief Development Officer, ServiceMaster.

Jeff Huebner, Chief Risk Officer, CSAA.

Innovation, High- and Low-Tech: How Insurers Are Driving Solutions

Moderator: Jennifer Kyung, VP, Chief Underwriter, USAA.

Panelists:

Partha Srinivasa, EVP, CIO, Erie Insurance.

Sam Krishnamurthy, CTO, Digital Solutions, Crawford.

Bob Marshall, CEO, Whisker Labs.

Stephen DiCenso, Principal,Milliman.

Charlie Sidoti, Executive Director, InnSure.

Outdated Regs to Legal System Abuse: It Will Take Villages to Fix This

Moderator: Zach Warmbrodt, financial services editor, Politico.

Panelists:

Parr Schoolman, SVP and Chief Risk Officer, Allstate.

Tim Judge, SVP, Head Modeler, Chief Climate Officer, Fannie Mae.

Dan Coates, Deputy Director, DRS, Federal Housing Finance Agency.

Fred Karlinsky, Co-Chair of Greenberg Traurig’s Global Insurance Regulatory & Transactions Practice Group.

Panelists and participants alike appreciated the compact, action-focused, conversational nature of the single-afternoon event, as well as the opportunity to discuss areas in which their diverse industry- or sector-specific priorities and efforts overlapped.

If you weren’t able to join us in Washington, don’t worry. In his closing remarks, Kevelighan announced plans to take the program on the road with a local and regional focus, so stay tuned. You can contact us if you’re interested in participating in future Town Halls or other Triple-I events. You also can join the “Attacking the Risk Crisis” LinkedIn Group to be part of the ongoing conversation.

Cyber Risk, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes, Floods, Highway Safety, Insurers and the Economy, Terrorism Risk

It’s Not an “Insurance Crisis” — It’s a Risk Crisis

Leave a comment

Ten states – Louisiana, Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia – as well as additional plaintiffs, are suing the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) over its new methodology for pricing flood insurance, Risk Rating 2.0. On Sept. 14, a federal hearing lasted six hours as the plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction to halt the new pricing regime while the lawsuit plays out.

Many residents of these states are understandably upset about seeing their flood insurance premium rates rise under the new approach. There may not be much comfort for them in knowing that the current system is much fairer than the previous one, in which higher-risk homeowners subsidized those with lower risks. Similarly, policyholders who have had their premium rates reduced under Risk Rating 2.0 are unlikely to take to the streets in celebration.

These homeowners aren’t alone in seeing insurance rates rise – or even having to struggle to obtain insurance. And these difficulties aren’t confined to holders of flood insurance policies. Florida and California are two states in which insurers have been forced to rethink their risk appetite – due in part to rising natural catastrophe losses and in part to regulatory and litigation environments that make it increasingly difficult for insurers to profitably write coverage.

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – and the supply-chain and inflationary pressures they created – the property/casualty insurance market was hardening as insurers adjusted their pricing and their risk appetites to keep pace with conditions that were driving losses up and eroding underwriting profitability – topics Triple-I has written about extensively (see a partial list below).

“Rising insurance rates are not the problem,” says Dale Porfilio, chief insurance officer at Triple-I. “They are a symptom of rising losses related to a range of factors, from climate and population trends to post-pandemic driving behaviors and surging cybercrime to antiquated policies, outdated building codes, fraud, and legal system abuse.”

In short, we are not experiencing an “insurance crisis,” as many media outlets tend to describe the current state of the market; we are experiencing a risk crisis. And even as the states referenced above push back against much-needed flood insurance reform, legislators in several states have been pushing measures that would restrict insurers’ ability to price coverage accurately and fairly – rather than addressing the underlying perils and forces aggravating them.  

Triple-I, its members, and a range of partners are working to educate stakeholders and decisionmakers and promote pre-emptive risk mitigation and investment in resilience. We are using our position as thought leaders and our unique non-lobbying role in the insurance industry to reach across sector boundaries and drive constructive action. You will be hearing more about these efforts over the next few months.

The success of these efforts will require a collective understanding among stakeholders and decisionmakers that for insurance to be available and affordable frequency and severity of risk must be measurably reduced. This will require highly focused, integrated projects and programs – many of them at the community level – in which all stakeholders (co-beneficiaries of these efforts) will share responsibility.

Want to know more about the risk crisis and how insurers are working to address it? Check out Triple-I’s upcoming Town Hall, “Attacking the Risk Crisis,” which will be held Nov. 30 in Washington, D.C.

Learn More:

Shutdown Threat Looms Over U.S. Flood Insurance

FEMA Incentive Program Helps Communities Reduce Flood Insurance Rates for Their Citizens

More Private Insurers Writing Flood Coverage; Consumer Demand Continues to Lag

Shift in Hurricane Season’s Predicted Severity Highlights Need for Prospective Cat Risk Pricing

California Needs to Make Changes to Address Its Climate Risk Crisis

Illinois Bill Highlights Need for Education on Risk-based Pricing of Insurance Coverage

IRC Outlines Florida’s Auto Insurance Affordability Problems

Education Can Overcome Doubts on Credit-Based Insurance Scores, IRC Survey Suggests

Matching Price to Peril Helps Keep Insurance Available & Affordable

Triple-I “State of the Risk” Issues Brief: Flood

Triple-I “State of the Risk” Issues Brief: Hurricanes

Triple-I Issues “Trends and Insights” Brief: Risk-Based Pricing of Insurance

Disaster Preparedness, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes, Homeowners Insurance

Earthquakes:You Can’t Predict Them, But You Can Prepare

Leave a comment

By Max Dorfman, Research Writer, Triple-I

“Neither the United States Geological Survey (USGS) nor any other scientists have accurately predicted a major earthquake,” according to a recent post in the California Residential Mitigation Program (CRMP) blog. “And scientists do not expect to be able to predict earthquakes in the future. However, USGS scientists can calculate the probability  that a significant earthquake will occur in a specific area within a certain number of years.”

CRMP is a joint powers authority formed by its members, the California Earthquake Authority and the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services.

Forecasting earthquakes directly before they occur is not possible – and the risk of a large earthquake remains high. With more than 15,000 known faults in California – more than 500 categorized as “active” – and most Californians living within 30 miles of an active fault, no one in the Golden State is immune to earthquake risk. 

With this in mind, the United States government has been working toward greater quake preparedness. The USGS recently released a report, UCERF3: A New Earthquake Forecast for California’s Complex System,projecting a 93 percent probability of one or more magnitude 6.7 quake or greater hitting Southern California over the  30-year period that began  in 2014. Additionally, the USGS predicts that, over the same period, there is more than a 99 percent chance of at least one magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquakes occurring in all of California.

What can you do to prepare?

ShakeAlert is a tool that helps Californians provide an initial alert concerning an imminent tremor. This early warning system delivers information that on earthquakes moments after it is begun, such as the expected intensity of ground shaking, and warning people who may be affected.

Additionally, retrofitting older homes – particularly those built before 1980, which predate modern seismic building codes – can help create more quake-resistant and resilient residences. Indeed, U.S. Census data found that than 53 percent of the housing units in San Diego County fall into that category.

As wildfires and other climate-related events continue to capture headlines, it’s important that homeowners and businesses in quake-prone areas do not neglect earthquake preparation. Most standard homeowners and renters insurance don’t cover most earthquake damage. However, with the right tools and information, people can better prepare for tremors, keeping themselves and their homes safe.

Catastrophes, Disaster Preparedness, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes, ESG, Insurers and the Economy, Regulation, Risk Management

As Nat Cat Losses Mount, A Resilience Mindset Matters More Than Ever

Leave a comment

Insurance is essential for individuals, businesses, and communities to recover quickly from natural  catastrophes – but perils have evolved to a point at which risk transfer, though necessary, isn’t enough to ensure resilience.

Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan said during a that better insured communities recover more quickly but “the long-term resilience of both the communities impacted by natural catastrophes and of the industry itself depend on preparedness and improved risk mitigation.”  He was one of three panelists participating in the webinar.

“Something’s Got to Give”

Insured U.S. natural catastrophe losses totaled $67 billion in 2020 after an Atlantic hurricane season which included 30 named storms, record-setting wildfires in California, Colorado, and the Pacific Northwest, and a severe derecho in Iowa. This year’s hurricane season looks to be more severe; the Bootleg wildfire in Oregon – so large and intense it has begun to create its own weather and is affecting air quality as far east as New York City – isn’t  expected to be fully contained until late November; and these disasters are taking place on the heels of devastating winter storms in the first quarter.

As Kevelighan put it in his panel remarks, pointing to a 700 percent increase in insurer loss costs since the 1980s, “Something’s got to give.”

“As the country’s financial first responders,” he said, “insurers are not just responsible for providing relief to the communities affected by natural disasters, but also planning for potential catastrophes to come.”  

One of the ways insurers do this, he said, is by building the industry’s cumulative policyholders’ surplus—the amount of money remaining after insurers’ collective liabilities are subtracted from their assets. At year-end 2020, the U.S. policyholders’ surplus stood at a record-high $914.3 billion.

Mitigate and educate

The role of the insurance industry has grown beyond merely taking on risks to educating the public, regulators, and corporate decision makers on the changing nature of risk and driving a resilience mindset characterized by a focus on pre-emptive mitigation and rapid recovery. Triple-I and a host of other insurance industry organizations have played a key role in promoting public-private partnerships and using advanced data and analytics to understand and address hazards in advance.

For example, Triple-I’s online Resilience Accelerator provides access to data and risk maps that empowers the public to assess and prepare for risks specific to their own communities.

This webinar, co-presented by The Institutes’ Griffith Foundation and the Insurance Regulator Education Foundation, included panelists Hanna Grant, Head of the Secretariat, Access to Insurance Initiative; and Dr. Abhishek Varma, Associate Professor, Finance, Insurance and Law, Illinois State University. It was moderated by James Jones, Executive Director, Katie School of Insurance and Financial Services, Illinois State University.

Webinar highlights:

Catastrophes, Disaster Preparedness, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes

Unethical Contractors Emerge After Disasters; Know How to Avoid Them

Leave a comment

Natural disasters create opportunities for unethical contractors, and consumers need to be on the alert.

Post-disaster repair scams typically start when a contractor makes an unsolicited visit to a homeowner and pressures the homeowner to pay the contractor their insurance claim money – then disappear without doing the work.

Triple-I is teaming up with the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) during the NICB’s Contractor Fraud Awareness Week (July 12-16) to educate the public about such frauds and how to avoid them.

Before hiring any contractor, consumers affected by a natural disaster should call their insurer. There’s no need to rush into an agreement. Homeowners should inspect all work and make sure they are satisfied before paying. Most contractors will require a reasonable down payment, but no payments should be made until a written contract is in place.

The NICB offers these tips to homeowners before hiring a contractor:

  • Be wary of anyone knocking on your door offering unsolicited repairs to your home. 
  • Be suspicious of any contractor who rushes you or says the government endorses them.
  • Shop around for a contractor by getting recommendations from people you trust.
  • Get three written estimates for the work and compare bids.
  • Check a contractor’s credentials with the Better Business Bureau.
  • Always ask for a written contract that clearly states everything the contractor will do.
  • Never sign a contract with blank spaces because it could be altered afterward.
  • Never pay for work up front and avoid paying with cash; use either a check or credit card.

The NICB Post-Disaster Contractor Search Checklist explains the contractor hiring process step by step.  Anyone with information concerning insurance fraud or vehicle theft can report it anonymously by calling toll-free 800-TEL-NICB (800-835-6422) or submitting a form to the NICB.

“Acting as communities’ financial first responders, insurers rebuild damaged homes, cars, and lives after a natural disaster,” said Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan.  “The Insurance Information Institute is proud to join forces with the NICB to educate consumers and communities about how to best prepare and recover economically.”

“Victims of disasters are under tremendous stress as they are often pulled from their homes, fight heavy traffic attempting to get to safety, all while leaving their home and belongings behind,” said NICB President and CEO David Glawe. “When they go home, they are exhausted and strained, a time when they are most susceptible to these fraudulent schemes.”

RELATED LINKS:

Article: Insurance Fraud

Facts & Statistics: Insurance Fraud