You won’t because as I stated:
I haven’t seen an instance yet where an insurance company made a force majeure argument against wildfire claims
That they will start to do so is purely my speculation. But they’re going to have to do something drastic because this kind of a massive payout is going to make the home insurance nonviable (in my opinion).
Stranger
Dude, you literally said " A few insurance companies have already said that paying out on fire insurance claims, and unless a policy explicitly includes wildfire as a covered cause of damage, they my attempt to invoke a force majeure argument.",
I just wanted to know who those companies were.
Okay, I see where the confusion is; that should have read “A few insurance companies have already said that paying out on fire insurance claims would render them insolvent, and unless…”
The force majeure argument is just speculation on my part, but it is far from an original idea; analysts looking at wildfire and other climate-induced threats have been warning for years that insurance companies are going to claim that damage from these events is an “act of God” and outside their actuarial models, and indeed, that there will likely be a massive crisis in home insurance across broad regions if not nationwide because of the costs of reimbursement.
Stranger
It was done for hundreds of years throughout the southwest using Adobe and clay tile roofs. No reason it can’t be done again.
I think you need to have a training chat with your auto speller or predictor. Pretty sure you want exacerbate.
People have mentioned recovery from the Camp Fire as an example of what to expect here in LA. But that was a small rural town in Northern California. Wouldn’t a better example to look at be recovery of towns like Malibu, Agoura Hills, Calabasas, etc. from the Woolsey Fire that same year?
Has rebuilding occurred in Malibu? Is the market for housing markedly different than before the fire?
With mostly tiny one or two room homes or Catholic-backed “missions” which were incredibly labor-intensive to construct, and if you’ve ever dealt with natural adobe you’d know how much regular maintenance it requires, especially after a rainy year. I like adobe (and cob) construction but they are not suited to large footprint suburban tract homes that many people want to live in.
Also, you want to make sure that you don’t use Adobe because just when you think you’ve got their licensing scheme worked out they change it on you and now you are paying three times as much for the same features except in a confusing new look, and you can’t change or maintain anything without paying more fees, and then they come and take your house away completely because you never owned it to begin with.
While the news has focused on high profile celebrities who have lost their homes, there were low income neighborhoods (and even at least one mobile home park) that have been impacted by the Palisades Fire, and despite claims that the people of Pasadena and Altadena are “rich”, most are middle-to-uipper-middle class working people and a lot of apartments impacted or destroyed in the Eaton Fire. (In fact, Altadena was originally the ‘black’ neighborhood development because Glendale and Pasadena had unofficial redlining policies, so the heritage construction are mostly smaller Craftsman-style homes and large bungalows which have been extended over the years.)
Calabasas, Aguora HIlls, and especially Malibu are more affluent areas, but yes, there is still a lot of reconstruction still going on six years after the Woolsey Fire even though it only destroyed less than 1,700 structures. The Eaton Fire alone triples that number and I don’t think there are even hard numbers on Palisades yet but it looks to be even greater.
Stranger
There are plenty of modern materials and construction techniques that remove those problems.
A different issue, but still a problem you want to avoid.
Modern ‘mudbrick’, cob, and rammed earth construction is still highly labor intensive and thus, very costly. I don’t disagree that these are structurally superior forms of construction that will produce a house not only better able to withstand fires and many other natural hazards (as well as lasting for centuries if correctly built and maintained) but is also sustainable and solid, but it is not practical for most homebuyers wanting a sizable footprint at an affordable cost, and very difficult to get financing for regardless of size.
Stranger
Regarding affordability of emerging fire-resistant methods and materials for home construction, might this disaster provide and opportunity for some entrepreneurs to scale-up production and thus bring down the costs a little? May not be much, but we’re talking perhaps 10,000 homes to be rebuilt. Thinking economies of scale here.
Poured concrete is inexpensive and not labor intensive. Insulation can be installed in the forms, or precast walls can be used also. Proper reinforcement and foundation construction will allow the structure to sufficiently withstand earthquakes. The outside can be coated to look like adobe, stucco, brickface, etc. Tile and metal shingle roofing are not expensive or labor intensive either. Size is not an issue. A home constructed this way will not be so difficult to insure either.
I’m sure that any insurance that may be available will require fire resistant construction and features regardless of cost. There are plenty of companies out there offering services and materials to make existing homes fire resistant, and a lot of this is actually required for new construction in designated fire vulnerable zones by California law. But short of going to some kind of mud-brick or rammed earth construction there is only so much that can be done to make homes able to resist the kind of conditions experienced in the Palisades and Eaton Fires; again, an 80+ mph wind blowing burning debris straight into the side of your house is going to burn or punch through ember-resistant cladding.
I don’t know if you’ve had concrete poured in the last decade but it is anything but ‘inexpensive’, and tile and metal roofing materials are definitely more costly than even fire-resistant shingles, and requires some expertise to install correctly.
Stranger
I have and it was not expensive. Much less expensive than alternatives. Fire resistant shingles are fine too. All shingles require expertise to install correctly.
Australian states have had direct experience of the same awful tragedy as we are seeing now. That has translated into more evidence-based building design requirements and ideas about architectural responses that minimise risk of fire from spot-overs. Examples:
There is also a lot of work in town-planning to try to stop building in areas that are high fire risk, but hard when people particularly desire living on the edge of a national park or on a bush block.
You’ve poured substantially above-grade concrete construction with upright forms or a flat slab at grade?
HomeAdvisor estimates that “Because of rising lumber prices, it’ll cost about 10% to 60% more to build an insulated concrete form (ICF) home over a traditional wooden house, depending on the labor required.” Which is consistent with what I’ve seen estimated everywhere. You’ll eventually realize substantial savings in lower energy costs, especially in warm climates like Southern California but initial construction costs are higher, even moreso if you want a multistory house to fit on a smaller parcel of land.
Stranger
This is a much larger source of problems than construction techniques.
Do you want fire resistant homes or not?
As someone who has played with house design, I would think that sheathing the house and the roof in corrugated sheet steel, and taking pains to make sure there are no exposed trusses, would make a house very fire-resistant and inexpensive.
Of course, that type of construction wouldn’t survive an immersion in a wildfire for hours, but I believe that most house fires are started by wind-blown sparks, not by flames playing on the house for hours.
I’m just pointing out some of the difficulties in financing (and sometimes even getting municipal and/or HOA approval) for fire resistant construction and features. Sorry to let facts get in your way.
Stranger
I read the wiki page on the Camp fire that essentially obliterated several towns in inland Northern California. The insurance company went bankrupt and could not cover their policies. So the state of California had to foot the bill. We are looking at multiple billions of dollars.
Additionally, it was found that many areas had become toxic through the release of asbestos and heavy metals.
Housing prices in surrounding areas shot up as a result of increased demand from the newly homeless.
The fire was in 2018. Paradise, a town of 30,000 at the time, has about 10,000 people now.