What to Do if You're Underinsured After a Wildfire
Amy Bach, Executive Director of United Policyholders, a nonprofit that helps disaster survivors navigate insurance claims, said underinsurance is one of the most common and complex challenges after a wildfire. But there are ways to identify your options, close the gap, and, in some cases, push back on your insurer.
The first thing to do is figure out how your coverage amount was set, and whether the underinsurance is the result of something you did, or the result of bad advice or miscommunication from your agent or insurer
'We encourage people to look through their emails and see what kind of communications they had with their agents and their insurance company,' Bach said. 'Did you ask for full coverage and get that assurance in writing?'
If you can find emails or records showing that your agent told you the coverage would be enough, and it wasn't, you may have a case to challenge the policy limits
'That's the make-or-break for an underinsurance case,' Bach said. 'If you have any evidence that the insurance company gave you that assurance, that can be the difference between getting your limits retroactively increased and just being stuck.'
Underinsurance often occurs when a homeowner hasn't adjusted their policy to keep up with rising construction costs or changes to their home. A policy might have been adequate years ago, but inflation, new building codes, and post-disaster price surges can leave coverage tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars short.
To avoid this, experts recommend:
In some cases, homeowners may have chosen not to add these features without fully understanding the risks, or weren't clearly advised about their options.
'The law in California is that the insurance company only has a duty to get you insurance. It doesn't have to be customized or adequate unless they voluntarily undertook a duty to make the coverage fit what you needed,' Bach said.
Even if your limits can't be increased, there are strategies to help you close the coverage gap.
Use Other Parts of Your Policy Some survivors use unspent personal property coverage to help pay for rebuilding, especially if they're not replacing everything they owned. In some cases, careful use of Additional Living Expenses (ALE) coverage can also help bridge short-term financial needs.
Scale Back the Rebuild Bach said some homeowners choose to adjust their relocation or rebuilding plans based on how far their insurance money can go.
'Some people fill their gap by using their contents money,' Bach said. 'Some people fill their gap by building a smaller home.'
Consider a Group Rebuild In fire-damaged communities, some homeowners work together to lower costs by organizing group rebuilds.
'They get together with a bunch of neighbors. They hire one builder. The builder gives them five choices of plans,' Bach said. 'It's sort of a semi-custom situation, and it makes it financially viable.'
Apply for a Loan
Homeowners may choose to borrow money to rebuild through a loan or a home equity line of credit (HELOC).
Bach said the best approach for most people is the Small Business Administration (SBA) disaster loan because of their very low interest rates. Affected homeowners can secure an SBA loan to supplement their insurance payment, even if they don't own a business.
If you believe you were misled or that your insurer acted in bad faith, it may be time to seek legal help.
'Very often, people who are underinsured end up having to hire a lawyer if they really want to push back,' Bach said. 'It's very hard to do it on your own.'
United Policyholders has more information and self-help materials on its website to guide underinsured wildfire survivors through the recovery process.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
American Military News
15 hours ago
- American Military News
Pic: California launches 'snitch line' to report styrofoam ban offenders
California recently launched a 'snitch line' webpage to provide a way for California residents to anonymously report companies that produce Expanded Polystyrene foodware products, also known as styrofoam products. The new website comes after Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) signed a law that officially banned the production and distribution of styrofoam foodware products earlier this year. According to a statement on the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery's website, the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act, which was outlined in Senate Bill 54, 'imposes minimum content requirements for single-use packaging and plastic food service ware, to be achieved through an extended producer responsibility (EPR) program.' According to The Post Millennial, while the ban on the production and distribution of styrofoam foodware products was implemented in January, producers have been allowed to continue selling styrofoam products if they achieved a 25% recycling target rate. However, according to the Surfrider Foundation, producers did not achieve the recycling rate by January. READ MORE: Secret JFK assassination files to be released on new webpage, GOP lawmaker says The new 'snitch line' webpage launched by the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery explains that the webpage is intended to 'hold producers responsible if they sell EPS plastic foam food ware in California until they meet a 25% recycling rate.' The webpage adds, 'Producers of Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) food service ware are currently restricted from selling or distributing EPS food service ware, like single-use takeout containers and cups, in or into California. Sellers of EPS food service ware who are NOT producers are not subject to this prohibition.' The new webpage also includes a confidentiality warning that informs users that reporting companies that produce and sell styrofoam foodware products will 'create a public record that is subject to California's Public Records Act.' The webpage allows users to choose whether they wish to 'remain anonymous' while reporting companies that violate California's styrofoam ban. A picture of California's new 'snitch line' website was shared Tuesday by Libs of TikTok on X, formerly Twitter. 'California now has a snitch line where residents can tell on fellow Californians for eating out of the wrong food containers after Newsom signed a law banning styrofoam containers,' Libs of TikTok tweeted. 'This is the same guy who called Trump a dictator.' California now has a snitch line where residents can tell on fellow Californians for eating out of the wrong food containers after Newsom signed a law banning styrofoam containers This is the same guy who called Trump a dictator — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) July 29, 2025
Los Angeles Times
a day ago
- Los Angeles Times
There's hope for pruning federal regulations. Some state experiments are paying off
President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act includes $100 million for the Office of Management and Budget 'to pay expenses associated with improving regulatory processes and analyzing and reviewing rules.' Following the Department of Government Efficiency initiative, this small investment won't make many headlines — but it should. If that money is put to use in the way several states have done to reduce built-up red tape, the return on investment will make even the crankiest budget hawk crack a smile. A recent Council of Economic Advisers report found that just a modest portion of the president's deregulatory agenda could save the nation some $907 billion. Californians, who live in America's most-regulated state, understand these costs better than most. Take housing, for example. California's thriving economy and broad appeal are a recipe for expensive homes, but its famously stringent building and other restrictions create something else: enough scarcity to propel home prices to around 2.5 times the national median. The costs extend further than the sticker price. They make it harder to rebuild after a natural disaster. They send workers and employers fleeing for other states or far-flung areas. They keep young people from finding their way to Westwood, Berkeley or Silicon Valley for better futures. All of this adds up, and it's about more than a handful of 'good' or 'bad' regulations. It's about moving too slowly to streamline an entire system that fails millions of people. Federal officials now have resources and a mandate to identify failures in the federal code — the question is 'how?' The answer is taking shape. Federal officials can look at a specific playbook that's getting results in nearby Richmond, Va. Shortly after taking office in 2022, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin issued an executive order setting the ambitious goal of cutting regulatory requirements by 25% by the end of his term. As of this month, his administration has hit the target, and Virginia's Office of Regulatory Management anticipates cutting nearly 33% — and 50% of the words in related guidance documents — by the end of his term. These numbers are not smoke and mirrors or budgeting gimmicks. Virginia painstakingly and comprehensively inventoried its regulations, including third-party standards that are referenced (which therefore become regulations, too) and guidance documents. Every change has been meticulously and transparently cataloged on the state's regulatory town hall website. And what's the return on investment? So far, it's saving Virginia businesses and citizens more than $1.2 billion per year. From reducing the number of training hours required to earn a living as a licensed cosmetologist to streamlining housing regulations (estimated to shave $24,000 off the construction cost of a new house and enable construction professionals to work much faster), working people are coming out ahead. Virginia is showing Washington that substantial regulatory reform can be accomplished on a shoestring budget. The office that was stood up to oversee the reforms — the Office of Regulatory Management — consists of only four dedicated employees: a director, a deputy director and two policy analysts. Going forward, artificial intelligence will further reduce the costs of cataloguing and processing untold amounts of regulatory requirements. The technology is a perfect fit for regulatory text. It can process thousands of pages in a tiny fraction of the time it takes a person — and given the hundreds of thousands of pages of such text on the books in Washington, investing in AI-driven regulatory review tech should be a top priority for that $100-million budget. The White House can also learn from Virginia's specific application of AI. The state is undertaking a pilot program with at least two separate approaches. First, its AI tool will scan both statutory and regulatory codes side by side and identify the regulatory requirements that go beyond the minimum laid out by statute. Many of these 'discretionary' requirements may still prove necessary to protect public health and safety, but some will not. A human being will then look at the mismatches and examine which regulations to consider scaling back. Second, the tool will compare each government agency's regulatory code against the corresponding codes of other states. A human being will again review the results and identify instances in which Virginia regulation is needlessly stricter than that of other states. For example, the algorithm might flag that Virginia requires professional masseurs to undergo 500 hours of training, while the least restrictive state requires only 300 hours. Absent evidence that the other state produces subpar or unsafe practitioners, Virginia officials might decide the 500-hour requirement is too strict. Of course, a state may have a perfectly legitimate reason to impose stricter regulatory restrictions than others. That's why the algorithm merely creates a 'heat map' to start the process of identifying onerous burdens. By producing the necessary analysis in a matter of seconds, it allows officials to focus on applying human insight and judgment. Led by Gov. Greg Abbott, Texas officials — noting my findings that their state is America's fifth-most-regulated and could see a half-trillion-dollar economic boost with its own deregulation effort — are now taking a similar approach to Virginia's. Imagine if the federal government were to implement similar technology. Gone would be the days of regulations from different agencies contradicting each other or outdated rules remaining on the books because humans haven't had the time to update them. The Trump administration hasn't shied away from making big bets and pushing fundamental reforms. With just a $100-million investment, officials in the Office of Management and Budget can now transform the way Washington regulates. They should start by talking to their counterparts in Richmond. Patrick A. McLaughlin, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, created the RegData and QuantGov projects, which quantify regulations using data-science tools and have informed reforms in several states.
San Francisco Chronicle
2 days ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
UC admits more California freshmen than ever — but fewer at top campuses
The University of California admitted more than 100,000 California first-year students for fall 2025 — a systemwide record — even as the most selective campuses extended fewer offers to in-state applicants. According to data released Monday by the UC Office of the President, 100,947 California residents received offers of admission, a 7.4% increase over last year's total of 93,990. The admission rate for California students rose to 77%, up from 70% in 2024. 'We continue to experience significant growth — a clear indication that Californians recognize the value of a UC degree,' UC President Michael V. Drake said in a statement. Four of the UC system's nine undergraduate campuses — Merced, Riverside, Davis and Santa Cruz — accounted for the increase in first-year admissions of California students. UC Merced in particular saw a whopping 71.9% surge in admissions of in-state students, after a 45% increase in applications following several changes that made it easier for students to apply and enroll there. UC Riverside also had a robust 46% increase in admissions of California students. Admissions of in-state first-year students fell slightly at its most competitive campuses: Berkeley, UCLA, San Diego, Irvine and Santa Barbara. Systemwide, UC admitted 149,368 first-year students from a pool of 205,348 applicants, increasing the overall admission rate to 73% from 66% last year, though not all are expected to accept the offer. Offers to domestic nonresidents rose by 9%, while international offers grew by 17%, despite lower anticipated enrollment from those groups. Among California admits, 41.8% reported low family incomes, up from 40.6% last year. While the proportion of first-generation college students dipped slightly to 42.4%, the actual number rose by more than 2,300. Admissions officials attributed the increase to the university's adherence to the California Master Plan for Higher Education, which guarantees admission to a UC campus for students in the top 9% of their high school class or statewide, regardless of standardized test scores. UC Berkeley, one of the most competitive campuses, admitted approximately 14,500 first-year students — 787 more than in 2024 — from a record 126,798 applicants. The campus also admitted more than 5,600 transfer students. Among freshman admits, 68% come from California and one in four identify as first-generation students. 'At Berkeley, we seek to find the most exceptional students wherever they are in the state, country or world, and it's especially rewarding when we can offer admission to more of these incredible students,' said Olufemi Ogundele, Berkeley's associate vice chancellor and dean of enrollment, in a statement. UC Davis admitted 55,739 undergraduate students for fall 2025, an 8.6% increase over the previous year. The total includes a record 45,963 first-year admissions — up 10.4% — and 9,776 transfer admissions, a slight increase from 2024. Of those admitted, 34,088 are California residents, representing 61.1% of the admitted class. The gains in admissions support UC's broader 2030 plan, which aims to gradually expand capacity for California undergraduates over the next five years.
