Rebuild or Relocate? How Home Insurance Impacts Wildfire Victims' Choices
The recent L.A. County wildfires have left many families in a tough spot, trying to figure out what to do next. Should they rebuild in the area still at risk or move somewhere safer? A big factor in that decision is home insurance, which can greatly impact the financial and logistical options available to those affected.
Insurance and RebuildingFor survivors, a good home insurance policy is a lifeline. Those with comprehensive insurance that covers fire damage see rebuilding as a real option. These policies cover not just the physical repairs but also temporary housing costs, and some even allow for safer, fire-resistant materials to be used. This support gives families the confidence to rebuild and get back to the community they love.
Some insurance plans have extended replacement cost coverage, which is crucial when costs are unknown, especially in L.A., where they can fluctuate wildly. State and federal assistance can fill in the gaps insurance leaves behind. However, navigating the claims process can be overwhelming. Many homeowners are unexpectedly faced with lower payouts that don't cover the cost of rebuilding. Disputes over damage assessments add to the emotional toll of losing your home.
Government Resources for Rebuilding
Los Angeles County is working to speed up the rebuilding process. California Governor Gavin Newsom has taken executive action to suspend regulatory barriers, while the L.A. County Board of Supervisors is working to cut red tape to get communities rebuilt. State and local officials have also declared emergencies to help speed up recovery.
The LA County Recovers website has information on rebuilding, which may vary by city or community. It includes resources specific to Los Angeles, Pasadena, Malibu, and Sierra Madre, as well as unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County, including Altadena and parts of Pacific Palisades.
Residents can start the rebuilding process by applying for permits. Note that construction cannot begin until the debris removal is complete, but you are encouraged to apply for the permits as soon as possible.
Insurance Challenges That Give Relocation PriorityConversely, many homeowners face insurance hurdles that make relocating seem like a better option than rebuilding. Insurance companies have raised premiums in high-risk areas to respond to wildfires, so some resident's policies are non-renewed. This leaves them in a tough spot with limited options.
When faced with high costs or loss of coverage, some homeowners turn to California's FAIR Plan – a last-resort insurance option. Unfortunately, that plan offers minimal coverage, so individuals risk huge out-of-pocket expenses if another wildfire hits. That uncertainty can sway many to consider relocating for safety.
Some insurance policies even offer incentives, through buyouts, to move. This encourages homeowners to sell rather than rebuild. Some plans cover alternative living expenses, making transitioning to a new area seem more financially appealing than throwing money into repairs.
A Financial and Emotional DecisionAt the end of the day, it's a financial and emotional decision. Those lucky enough to have good insurance may feel compelled to reinvest, but it may be the only way to stop the financial bleeding for others. Those facing serious insurance challenges may prioritize safety and stability over the emotional ties to their old lives.
This decision-making process is also fraught with emotional weight. Families have deep roots in their neighborhoods, schools, and local communities, so leaving all that behind is tough. These ties complicate what seems like a simple financial decision.
Given these challenges, government agencies and policymakers are exploring ways to support residents. State-backed insurance programs and mitigation efforts are being discussed to give residents more options and resources to manage wildfire risk.
The Next StepsAs communities recover from devastating wildfires, the choice to rebuild or relocate is a difficult one. Homeowners must weigh their situation with the financial reality and navigate an ever-changing insurance landscape that impacts their options. Right now, it's clear that home insurance is a key part of the recovery process for those affected by the wildfires.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
9 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Los Angeles County fire victims sue AAA and USAA, alleging insurance fraud
Los Angeles County fire victims have filed lawsuits against three large home insurers alleging they were systematically underinsured, leaving them without enough money to replace or rebuild their homes after the Jan. 7 blazes. The twin lawsuits, filed Wednesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court, allege that USAA, a Texas-based insurer that serves the military community, and two insurers affiliated with AAA for years underestimated the replacement cost of the homes, lulling the policyholders into buying inadequate coverage. "These families paid their premiums, trusted their insurers, and did everything right," attorney Gregory L. Bentley said in a statement. "But when disaster struck, they learned their coverage was little more than an illusion. These companies promised peace of mind, but instead left their members stranded, homeless, and hopeless." The lawsuits allege fraud, negligence, breach of contract and other causes of action, and seek damages and reform of the insurers' practices. Bekah Nelson, lead communications director for USAA, said that the company was reviewing the lawsuit and could not comment on specifics, but said "USAA's dedication to outstanding member service is widely recognized." "When wildfires struck Southern California, our teams were on the ground within days, working to support our members in their time of need. To date, we have paid nearly $1.4 billion to help members recover from their losses," she said, adding the company has made payments on more than 90% of homeowner claims. A spokesperson for CSAA Insurance Exchange, which primarily serves AAA members in Northern California, said it does not comment on pending litigation. A spokesperson for the Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club, which serves AAA members in Southern California, also declined comment. The lawsuits open a new front in the litigation that has been spawned by the catastrophic fires, which caused at least 29 deaths and damaged or destroyed more than 16,000 homes and businesses in Altadena, Pacific Palisades and other communities. Several lawsuits have been filed against the California Fair Plan Assn., the state's insurer of last resort, alleging that it is not adequately handling smoke-damage claims arising out of the fires. More than 100 of the state's licensed home insurers, including the CSAA, USAA and the Interinsurance Exchange, are defendants in an April lawsuit accusing the companies of colluding to drop policyholders and force them onto the FAIR Plan in order to reduce their claims exposure. The plan's policies typically cost more and offer less coverage than traditional commercial insurance. The lawsuits filed Wednesday, which are virtually identical except for details pertaining to the different defendants, allege that the problem of underinsurance is "pervasive" and stems from "cost estimator software many insurers use to recommend coverage limits to insureds," as well as "poor design choices, perverse profit and commission incentives, volume business, and other shortcomings." The lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed against the two AAA insurers, James and Lisa Fulker, bought a three-bedroom, two-bathroom, 1,872-square-foot home on Kingsport Drive in Malibu in 2020, according to the lawsuit. The newly renovated home - which featured a kitchen with a center island, quartz countertops, high ceilings, a fireplace, an entertainment patio and a master suite with a walk-in closet and spa-like bath - had $713,000 in primary dwelling coverage and 125% extended replacement cost coverage, the lawsuit states. After the fires, however, the couple found their coverage was inadequate as they received estimates of at least $800 per square foot or more to rebuild, far exceeding the $380-per-square-foot calculations of their insurer, the lawsuit states. The lead plaintiffs in the USAA lawsuit, Ethan and Marijana Alexander, had a 2,135-square-foot, four-bedroom, three-bathroom, near-custom home on Bienveneda Avenue in Pacific Palisades that they bought in 2018, according to the lawsuit. The home had $584,000 in dwelling coverage and a 25% home protection endorsement of $146,000, the lawsuit states. Even with the additional coverage, the complaint alleges the couple don't have adequate insurance to rebuild, with USAA calculating the cost at $342 per square foot and the couple receiving estimates at more than $850 to $1,000 per square foot, the lawsuit states. Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Los Angeles Times
13 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
CalAssist Mortgage Fund provides $105M in aid for California Disaster Survivors
The CalAssist Mortgage Fund is a new source of financial relief for California homeowners whose properties were destroyed after recent disasters. The fund provides grants of up to $20,000 to cover three months of mortgage payments for eligible homeowners. The state has allocated $105 million for the program. 'California is extending this ongoing support to disaster victims in Los Angeles and beyond, by assisting with mortgage payments to relieve financial pressure and stress as families rebuild and recover,' Governor Gavin Newsom said in a press release. The grants do not need to be repaid and will be sent directly to mortgage companies, minimizing the steps required for processing and allowing homeowners to focus on recovery. Major fires, floods, and other government-declared disasters or states of emergency that occurred between January 2023 and January 2025 are qualifying events for the grants, including the Eaton and Palisades fires that burned thousands of homes. Research by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, which analyzed wildfire losses in California between 2017 and 2021, found that nearly 40% of damaged homes were underinsured by more than $100,000, and more than 1 in 5 had shortfalls exceeding $200,000. The prevalence of these types of insurance gaps, combined with the emotional and financial toll of losing a home, highlights the importance of programs like the CalAssist Mortgage Fund. 'Homeowners whose home was destroyed in a recent fire, flood or other disaster deserve support in their recovery. We know that recovery takes time, and the state is here to support,' Newsom said in the release. The California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) is administering the program. In addition to the mortgage grants, CalHFA is also providing $25 million in housing counseling support through its National Mortgage Settlement (NMS) Housing Counseling program. This program is designed to help homeowners understand their options, complete applications, and navigate the recovery process. To be eligible for financial assistance through the CalAssist Mortgage Fund, an applicant's primary residence must be a single-family home, condo, or permanently affixed manufactured home. Properties with up to four units are included. Disaster survivors must also have an active mortgage or reverse mortgage, and the property cannot currently be in foreclosure. Applications for the CalAssist Mortgage Fund open on June 12, 2025. Homeowners are encouraged to apply as soon as possible before funds are exhausted. Steps to Apply For more information on eligibility and the application process, visit Disaster survivors who need assistance can also call 1-800-501-0019 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. The LA County Department of Consumer and Business Affairs' foreclosure prevention expert can help homeowners facing difficulty paying their mortgage. You can also discuss other relief options with a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-certified housing counselor.
Associated Press
13 hours ago
- Associated Press
Power bills in California have jumped nearly 50% in four years. Democrats think they have solutions
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers this week advanced several efforts aimed at reining in utility profits and slashing electricity bills as part of their agenda to tackle the sky-high costs of living. The proposals would make sweeping changes to how utilities fund expensive infrastructure projects like putting power lines underground to guard against wildfires. They also would add more oversight around wildfire mitigation spending and put new requirements on utility requests to increase rates. Supporters said the goal is to make the big investor-owned utilities start sharing some of the costs to fight wildfires and build new transmission infrastructure. 'This is not a set of modest tweaks that will make minor improvements at the edges of a problem without offending anyone,' said Democratic State Sen. Josh Becker, the bill's author. 'This is a big deal.' One of the bills is part of the state Senate's package to address affordability amid growing concern about the high costs of everything from gas to groceries. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order last year urging lawmakers to do something to address skyrocketing electricity rates, which rose 47% on average for residential customers between 2019 and 2023, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analysts Office. But Republicans, who are in the minority in both chambers, say Democrats are not meaningfully addressing high prices. They did not support the energy reform bills, saying it wouldn't lower costs, and they unsuccessfully tried to force a vote on a proposal to limit utilities from raising power rates above the rate of inflation. Rising rates Utility rate increases in recent years have been approved by state regulators in part to help investor-owned utilities bury power lines aimed at stopping wildfires. Some of the deadliest and most destructive fires in recent years have been sparked by power equipment. Pacific Gas & Electric, whose equipment sparked a 2018 wildfire that killed 85 people in 2024, raised its rates six times to help cover the costs of putting power lines underground and other improvement projects. While one in every five ratepayers can't pay their power bills, utilities like PG&E raked in record-breaking profits last year, according to The Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group. The group supports Becker's measure and has sponsored a similar effort in the Assembly. 'There are no limits to how much the utilities can ask for in rate increases. There are no limits to how many times a year they can ask,' said Mark Toney, the group's executive director. 'You can't blame them for asking for the sky.' Under Becker's proposal, utilities would be required to use public financing to fund the first $15 billion spent on capital investment projects. The option would allow utilities to access funding with lower interest rates, and utilities also would be prohibited from collecting a return on that investment for shareholders. That would save customers $8.8 billion over the next 10 years, Becker said. The bill would also set up a state-backed fund to reimburse utilities for wildfire projects, among other things. But the state may not have money to pay for that this year. The bill would also increase oversight of utility budgets and their wildfire spending. Utilities would have to include at least one rate increase proposal that doesn't exceed the rate of inflation in their requests. The proposal also calls for $60 billion worth of credits to apply on bills over the years during the summer months when usage is often at its peak. Opposition from Republicans, utilities Senate Democrats overwhelmingly advanced Becker's measure this week. But Republicans, utilities and the California Chamber of Commerce said it would only drive up more costs. The legislation 'moves today's utility costs around without eliminating them,' the chamber said in a letter in opposition. New regulations around rate increase and shareholder returns also could halt utilities' investment in preventing wildfires or enhancing the grid, the letter said. Republican State senators said rising power bills are caused by Democrats' policies and push for more electric vehicles and less reliance on fossil fuels. In the Assembly, meanwhile, Republicans have called for permitting reforms to make it faster and cheaper to build better utility infrastructure. 'The regulation regime that we have in this state is oppressive and definitely drives prices,' said Sen. Roger Niello, a Republican. 'Your package of affordability is rather modest in number, but it is even more modest in its potential impact.' Lawmakers also advanced a slew of other measures aiming to provide relief to ratepayers, including one that would prohibit utilities from using rates to pay for lobbying efforts and one that would allow California to join a regional energy market with other Western states to help increase grid reliability.
