logo
Insurance ‘re-underwriting' is on the rise in California. Here's how I fought State Farm and won

Insurance ‘re-underwriting' is on the rise in California. Here's how I fought State Farm and won

State Farm, my home insurer for the past 25 years, recently wrote to enumerate several 'positive measures that should be taken to reduce the risk for loss.'
That sounded positive enough — until I read that if my husband and I didn't comply, including installing a new roof (at an average local cost of $16,051), the company would 'non-renew' us.
Such threats, known as 're-underwriting,' have panicked many Californians because State Farm and other large insurance firms have abruptly cited reasons to cancel clients who must then scramble for scarce and often costlier policies.
Our State Farm letter said our roof must be replaced 'as evidenced by the granular loss and worn shingles.' We were also directed to trim landscaping around the house and trim some overhanging tree limbs.
We figured we could do the landscaping ourselves and hire a tree-trimmer for less than $700.
The roof was another matter.
We had already replaced nearly all of it during the past 10 years. Sara Lopez, president of our contractor, McLeran Roofing in San Rafael, assured us it was in good condition and made with fire-resistant, Class-A composition shingles. What's more, our home in San Anselmo is not in a high-risk zone for fires, according to Cal Fire maps.
So why was State Farm telling us to spend $16,000 that we didn't have?
I called our longtime insurance agent, expecting support. After all, 'like a good neighbor,' he sends us holiday cards every year. While waiting to hear back, like any good Boomer, I took my complaints to Facebook and Nextdoor, where I received lots of comments like: 'We are in the same boat. Redoing our roof next month.'
Of course, I support fire safety and doing anything I can to protect the life savings embedded in our home. Yet anecdotal and press reports warned me we could do everything State Farm demanded and still lose coverage.
Amy Bach, executive director of United Policyholders, a consumer advocacy group in San Francisco, suggested a reason for the increasing trend.
'It's not only that climate change is increasing natural-disaster risk; it's also that insurers are buying aerial imaging and risk-scoring tools that are making it too easy to put existing customers in the discard file,' she said. 'They're taking away the human look at a property and replacing it with a number.'
Bach and other experts say they believe that increasingly risk-adverse insurance companies are targeting older homes like ours (built in 1948) because, on average, they'll have more — and riskier — old-fashioned plumbing and wiring.
Our agent promised to fight for us but said he couldn't guarantee that, even if we did everything they asked, we would be reinsured. (Such a promise would give us grounds to claim a breach of contract.) Instead, he asked for copies of our roof-repair invoices and evidence of our roof's condition.
We paid $350 for an inspection that echoed Lopez's assessment. Our agent then told us he had aerial photos of moss growing on it.
'You need to remove that moss,' he said.
'You don't need to remove that moss,' retorted Lopez, who said it wasn't harmful, whereas power-washing to remove it could actually damage our shingles.
Our agent countered that the Bad Cop underwriters wouldn't appreciate us challenging their diktat. So, we paid a guy $500 to power wash the roof, even as I worried it would all be for naught.
In January, the same month we got that State Farm letter, a San Diego law firm filed a homeowners' class-action suit against Liberty Mutual, claiming the firm canceled policies after flawed drone inspections falsely reported issues such as algae, mildew or mold.
'People would challenge the reports and Liberty would send an 'engineering report' with aerial photos,' said plaintiffs' attorney Michelle Meyers. 'Then people would get their roofs power-washed and Liberty would still maintain the non-renewal.'
What should we do? I asked Meyers.
'You have to challenge the non-renewal and at the same time, unfortunately, keep looking for new insurance,' she said. '(((You don't want to get dropped because all the insurance companies talk to each other…))))You need to show you've taken steps either to comply or show them the evidence that it's not needed.'
((((Joel Gumbiner, a San Rafael attorney who helps clients fight insurance firms for coverage, confirmed that insurance companies are legally free to non-renew for almost any reason. They just have to give you 75 days notice and it has to be when your policy is due for renewal.))))
'The bottom line is we don't have a law on the books to force companies to insure someone they don't want to,' Bach said.
Her organization has recently lobbied for legislation to require insurers to notify policyholders of problems, give them time to fix them, and then, if the problems are fixed, renew.
In the meantime, Bach advises policyholders to 'be tenacious. Send pictures and documents from third-party experts.' She said at least two insurance firms, Mercury and CSAA, have accepted certificates of fire safety from the Insurance Institute for Home and Business Safety as a basis to renew policies.
If all else fails, Bach says, ask for assistance from the California Department of Insurance, which occasionally works.
Still, with Meyers' dark scenario in mind, I started checking out our options, should State Farm finally drop us.
They weren't great.
State Farm, which stopped writing new policies in California in 2023, isn't the only big insurer trying to wind down. Two Farmers Insurance Group subsidiaries and Amguard are quitting altogether.
A broker recommended we turn to the FAIR plan, California's fire-risk insurer of last resort, and supplement that limited and pricey plan with one from a small, unaccredited firm called Bamboo. Both providers get terrible reviews. Meanwhile, I heard from friends who said they were now paying as much as $10,000 annually for insurance.
A couple of weeks ago, however, after three months of stress, our agent emailed that our efforts had sufficed — at least for another year or two. In the meantime, State Farm (which paid its CEO a record $24.4 million in 2022) seemed closer to getting an 'emergency' 17% rate hike.
I suppose it's all part of our dreadful new normal.
The escalating fire risks from our world's increasing negligence about climate change are playing havoc with all our old assumptions, including the one where insurance firms, 'like a good neighbor,' competed for customers rather than scheming to drop them. While I'm grateful to our agent for helping us hang on, I fear that from now on, his holiday cards will simply remind me how the vestiges of courtesy that once held us together are going up in flames.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

California's war on rooftop solar: A new bill could dim homeowners' energy freedom
California's war on rooftop solar: A new bill could dim homeowners' energy freedom

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

California's war on rooftop solar: A new bill could dim homeowners' energy freedom

California has long been a leader in solar adoption in the U.S., but a new bill gutting the state's net metering policy would deal a sharp blow to solar homeowners in the Golden state. With the help of favorable government policies and incentives spurring the expansion of solar deployment, California became a solar-friendly state for homeowners looking to save money while living more sustainably. But now, the state is poised to renege on its commitment to solar customers with the potential passage of Assembly Bill 942, a bill that would repeal net metering rules that had previously grandfathered in homeowners who had already gone solar years earlier. This May, the California State Assembly Commission passed an amended bill, known as AB 942, that proposes to sunset existing net metering contracts beginning in July 2026. Net metering is a policy that allows homeowners to send the excess electricity produced by their solar panels back to the grid and receive a credit for that energy on their utility bill. This practice is designed to return excess output to the grid, which in turn benefits local economies and reduces homeowners energy bills. Stay informed on the latest industry news—delivered to your inbox each month. Sign up for EnergySage's newsletter. All told, NEM programs have proved wildly successful at spurring solar adoption, with over 2 million households installing solar panels —, totaling 17 gigawatts. According to one industry study from a solar and storage trade group, those installations have produced $1.5 billion in cumulative savings for all customers. Net metering was first made available to Californians 30 years ago, and in subsequent years and revisions to the program, the state uncapped net energy metering (NEM) to allow new systems to produce more than a previously mandated limit of 1,000kW. While some of the other benefits of NEM were rolled back over the past few years, the program still greatly benefited solar homeowners. If AB 942 passes it will be a different story: Existing net metering contracts (under NEM versions 1.0 and 2.0) would be voided once a home is sold or its deed is transferred. That home and its system would then be regulated under the most recent version, NEM 3.0. According to the bill's author, Assemblyperson Lisa Calderon, AB 942's purpose is to address the financial shortfall of grid maintenance costs that are being covered largely by non-solar customers. 'Our energy bills are becoming increasingly unaffordable, and we must address this ratepayer inequity,' Calderon said in a recent press release. The environmental imperative of renewable energy aside, a key motivation for homeowners who want to go solar is to save course, lower utility bills piques anyone's interest, and is one of the reasons reason net metering has become so popular in one state after the next – it helps homeowners conserve energy and money at the same time. But according to critics, California had already strayed from its original mission. With the introduction of NEM 3.0 in April 2023, California swapped out net metering for a net billing tariff program (aka net billing), an arguably inferior system that substantially reduces the credits customers receive for sending excess energy to the grid, averaging about 5 to 6 cents per kilowatt hour. This is because the energy offsets are now valued based on the avoided costs to the utility company. In previous versions of NEM, the credits' value was equal to those deducted whenever energy had to be imported from the grid; a simple 1:1 exchange rate. Should AB 942 become law, homebuyers would be unable to inherit the benefits of existing contracts under NEM 1.0 or 2.0. (Under these versions, net metering contracts have a 20-year term and are tied to the installations, not homeowners.) Instead, those contracts would automatically shift to NEM 3.0. 'People made huge financial decisions to put solar on their roofs, with guaranteed paybacks because of these agreements,' Jeremy Nicholson, CEO of Sunergy, a California-based solar installer, told EnergySage. 'Changing that midstream would be a huge disservice. It completely erodes consumer confidence. Whatever agreements you have in place, you need to ride out to the finish line.' A key feature of those older agreements is the guarantee that one homeowner can pass savings onto the next. That alone is a huge selling point for buyers in a state like California where electricity rates seem to increase exponentially. Assemblyperson Calderon, a democrat representing California's predominantly suburban 56th State Assembly district, claims AB 942 is a question of economic equity. Her office cites a recent study conducted by the state's Public Advocates Office, which claims that in 2024 alone net metering shifted excess costs totaling $8.5 billion to non-solar ratepayers. 'Without modifications, the cost shift will continue to escalate as retail rates for electricity increase,' according to the study. It's also worth noting that Calderon herself is a former long-time employee of Southern California Edison, a large investor-owned utility and understands how they operate. While it is true that electricity rates in California are well above the national average—30 cents/kWh versus 19 cents nationally—the data for these figures comes directly from the utility companies themselves—an obvious conflict of interest. Other reports found different results: A 2021 counter study conducted by Solar United Neighbors denies the claim that cost shifting is hurting regular Californians. 'The utility's cost shift claim is false,' the Solar United report says 'Research on the issue concludes that rooftop solar more often provides a net benefit to all ratepayers.' 'Utility companies are forced monopolies, and what they're trying to do is get rid of the competition,' Nicholson says. 'An apt analogy is the U.S. Post Office versus FedEx, it's utility companies versus solar. We are the industry disruptor. And even with that competition, even with all the solar in California, rates have gone up over 50% in the last seven years.' Large utilities have made the case that increased rates are needed to help offset the costs of upgrading the U.S.'s aging electrical grid. But that,too, has been called into question, given that transmission and distribution spending on the part of California's three largest utilities has increased exponentially in recent years while electricity usage has remained relatively steady. The conclusion many critics have drawn is that, as investor-owned businesses, the utilities are motivated more by profit margins and keeping shareholders happy than providing value to their customers. 'The claim here is people who went solar are placing an undue burden on the rest of consumers, but that's not a fluid argument,' Nicholson told EnergySage. 'It may have held water if consumption remained the same across the nation and across utilities, but demand has only increased … people say you can't see the future, but I disagree. Solar takes strain off the grid and gives resiliency to customers. It's not even an ROI or cost-saving argument anymore. This is insurance.'

Popular California tax payment system is down — just as quarterly deadline nears
Popular California tax payment system is down — just as quarterly deadline nears

San Francisco Chronicle​

time6 hours ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Popular California tax payment system is down — just as quarterly deadline nears

Californians trying to pay their second-quarter estimated taxes before Monday's deadline through the Franchise Tax Board's MyFTB application have been unable to access the online service since at least Tuesday night. A warning on the FTB's Maintenance page as of Thursday afternoon said, 'We are experiencing technical issues that may impact some of our online services such as MyFTB, CalFile, and MEC (minimum essential coverage) Information Reporting. The issues also affect information we can provide over the phone.' It says taxpayers who need to make an online payment 'can use our version of Web Pay that doesn't require you to log into MyFTB. You can also use our general chat for non-confidential tax questions.' 'Earlier this week FTB experienced an internal system problem that affected some online self-service applications. The outage was not due to a cyber attack. Online services will be fully operational by Friday morning,' FTB spokesman Andrew LePage said via email. He did not elaborate on when the outage started or the cause. Individuals and businesses are encouraged to set up a MyFTB account, which stores a wealth of taxpayer information, according to the FTB's website. It lets individuals view account balances, estimated payments and credits, payment history, a list and image of tax returns, notices and correspondence, activities that occurred on their account, a list of authorized representatives who can access their account and California wage and withholding information. They can view and update contact information and access WebPay and CalFile, a free tax-filing service for some people. Palo Alto resident Skip Shapiro said he made his first-quarter estimated tax payment through his MyFTB account earlier his year but when he tried to access it Tuesday evening to make his second-quarter payment, it was down. 'It is troubling that what presumably is a critical means by which the state collects revenue is out of order,' he said via email. Shapiro said he ended up using WebPay, 'which doesn't require a user ID and password (i.e. an account), so any payment made is a 'one-off' transaction whose history is not retained by the application. Conversely, this information is stored in my myFTB account.' Spidell, an Anaheim publisher of state and federal tax information, has a brief note about the outage on its website and how it will affect tax professionals who — on behalf of their clients — need to make certain payments or ask the FTB questions.

California Announces Investigation Into State Farm
California Announces Investigation Into State Farm

New York Times

time8 hours ago

  • New York Times

California Announces Investigation Into State Farm

Ricardo Lara, California's Insurance Commissioner, announced a formal investigation into State Farm on Thursday, as complaints continue to mount about the insurer's handling of claims from the catastrophic wildfires in Los Angeles. The so-called 'market conduct examination' is a tool used when there is evidence of broad consumer complaints, according to a spokesman for the department. It's the fourth time that State Farm General Insurance Company — the state's largest insurer, which covers one out of every five homes in California — has been the subject of such an investigation since 2014, said Michael Soller, a deputy insurance commissioner. 'Some troubling patterns that my staff will investigate include the frequent reassignment of multiple adjusters with little continuity in communication, inconsistent management of similar claims, and inadequate record-keeping,' Mr. Lara said in a statement. 'These issues create unnecessary stress, prolong recovery, and erode trust.' The multiple fires that erupted on Jan. 7 in Eaton Canyon and on a hillside in Pacific Palisades have left a burn zone unlike almost any other — over 16,000 homes, businesses and other structures were obliterated and many others were damaged by toxic smoke. The fires are being described as among the most destructive in California's history, and have displaced thousands of people. Complaints against State Farm have been growing from the first weeks after the fire. A group of survivors from Altadena, the community flanking Eaton Canyon where one of the blazes started, have collected over 400 complaints from victims whose homes were insured by State Farm. The homeowners, who first found each other on a WhatsApp group for pickleball enthusiasts before migrating to the gaming app Discord, describe a pattern of delays and foot-dragging that they say has worn them down. Among the complaints is a pattern of rotating adjusters — where the same damaged home is assessed by one adjuster, only to be passed off to another, then another, forcing the homeowner to start from scratch with each new consultant, said Joy Chen, a former deputy mayor of Los Angeles, who runs the Eaton Fire Survivors Network, which collected the accounts. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store