BadgeIsBack

I made a big song and dance about being in a big fireprone area - and my premium was not added to. I don't think it is necessarily even more expensive.

BadgeIsBack

Apologies for the multiple posts...

There are stories of people in our village who after initially being elated over their houses surviving at the expense of others that didn't, moving because the houses re-built around them were 'bigger' and better. It got to them eventually.

MartinLuther

A friend's uncle defended his home in the Canberra fires. It was the only one in his street to survive. He now has the crappiest house in the street.

Amazulu

We live in a bushfire risk area and all this 'stay or go' crap annoys me. Just go, it's only a house. If we ever get it here in Kalamunda, we're going - no questions. We are also very over-insured.

jad n rich

Weve had a couple of houses in dense bushland, areas well known for that feature and as you say no added premium.

I cant personally understand how someone who can buy a house, cant afford house insurance? Never paid more than $400 ish a year for any house. Its actually one of the things that is not expensive in OZ, its often cheaper than our car insurances.

I think many people who dont carry insurance probably expect community will pay up. Its whats happened in the past, in floods and bushfires, no insurance, charity will cough up, maybe people just rely on that.

MartinLuther

Do you think the fund/insurance will cover the special weeds one bloke was growing at a house we were defending the other night?

Amazulu

Agree. Building insurance is very cheap in Australia and there is no excuse not to have it. I actually think it should be compulsory.

LouiseR

I think the homes should be rebuilt for free but the contents of peoples home shouldn't be replaced. IMO if you can't afford at the very least contents insurance then surely you should have nothing of value inside your home.

We had major floods in gloucestershire 2 years ago and some people lost everything but a lot weren't insured.

They were moaning about how on earth would they replace their plasma TV's, DFS sofa's, Expensive Kids Toys but yet couldn't afford £5 a month contents insurance...

emelems

Indeed! where would we be without Mr D ! LOL!

Em x

emelems

ye gods! I hope not! Not because of the "good sense" behind the theory, just because we are adults and free (to a certain extent) and it is, effectively, up to us to decide on our fates...

re OP question... then the offical answer is no, the unoffical help, ie, people helping you out regardless, should be yes all the way

Em x

asprilla

completely agree.

arkon

I agree, what's the point of us all having insurance if you are going to get bailed out. The money should be spent of rebuilding all the comunity buldings, parks, roads etc. The rest given to the children that are now orphans to house them and re home them, if giving money to parents that lost children helps them in some way then they too should get some. I like the interest free loans idea too. But not insuring yourself in this country is madness, and surely madness shouldn't be encouraged.

Geelong Gent

http://www.theage.com.au/national/fo...0213-872c.html

Perhaps a big chunk of money should go to paying back these guys (CFA members having to take annual leave?)

Flutterby

Is it not the case in the UK for example that if you have a mortgage that you have to have buildings insurance as a minimum? I may be wrong but I thought that this was the case.

There is a clear sentiment on this thread from some people that if you lose your house that it should be rebuilt for free, even if you don't have insurance. Is this because of the sheer number of houses that were lost in these fires and the emotions that are clearly very strong on this subject because we feel such sympathy for the victims?

What about the individual house that burns down on your street next week? This person has no insurance either for their building or contents and has lost everything, should their house be rebuilt as well for free?

This argument raged in the UK in 2007 after the July floods and my opinion was the same then as it is now. You buy insurance for a reason, it is "just in case" you need it.

NKSK version 2

I agree.

I don't think anyone couldn't feel for the victims - especially the children.

I'm happy for the money I donated to be used for clothes, for temporary shelter, - pretty much anything but not for rebuilding houses of those who were not insured (and The Australian reported the other day that up to fifth may not be insured)

To me, house insurance is one of the basics in life. If you can afford more than a battered up old car and a decent tv, you can afford the $30 a month buildings insurance.