Queensland Floods

[Scotty]

Don't quote me but I think you will find that the regulations re building in flood prone areas differ for non residential property.

Correct. Not sure how it works for Stadia, but for parks, ovals, golf course these are often used as flood plains or detention basins of sorts.

 

[Elfster]

One of the things coming out about all of this are calls for a "national disaster fund". Almost an additional levy on all similar to the medicare levy. Where some of the funds are retained for disasters we are currently experiencing and the balance for spending on flood/ fire/ drought mitigation projects. Probably a good idea in principle but there are issues relating to State rights and own interests. Potential waste and the chance that the government will raid the fund for other purposes. Other similar funds or insurance things exist elsewhere - New Zealand for earthquakes. Whether it is time for something similar in Australia is a moot point. Especially if these sort of events are becoming more frequent. Afterall we do seem to be having quite a few "1 in 100 etc" events recently. (And really a once in a 100 year event in theory is more common than one thinks. Statistically the chances are quite high you will experience two of those in a 70-odd year period).

 

[stoff]

On your point Elfster, what people don't seem to understand that a 1 in 100 year event means that the probability of an event occurring is 1% in any given year. I think the terminology is misleading as 1 in 100 years seems to give a false comfort that once an event has occurred, it will not occur again for another 100 years.

With regard to a national disaster fund, I wonder where you set the bar for how much should be in the fund. Given the size of the country and the regular occurence of natural disasters, how much is enough. In the last nine years off the top of my head I can think of three major incidents - Canberra Bushfires, Black Saturday, Queensland Floods. All of these have had damage bills into the billions of dollars. Whilst I think the concept is probably a good idea (subject to the shortcomings Elfster has mentioned), it is something that requires alot of thought and I hope that the government doesn't jump in with all guns blazing setting up something that probably seems popular, without proper consideration (again). I also hope the fund doesn't become a de-facto insurance policy for those who have had the means to insure a property and chose not to. I know a few people who were adequately insured for Black Saturday who are still not happy that those who weren't were bailed out by the funds from the Bushfire appeal.

 

[Elfster]

Stoff, I agree with your point about a potential national fund being used as a de-facto insurance fund. People will still need insurance and a fund shouldn't discriminate or treat unfailry those people who have paid for insurance.

 

[Scotty]

People that did the right think and ensured they had flood insurance should get just as much support as those that didn't. It is certainly not fair that those that don't have insurance get bailed out.

However, that is our culture somewhat, isn't it. Particularly the culture pushed by the far left - those that don't work (but could) still get supported by those that do.

 

[barbarian]

I don't know how much of the relief funds will end up going to individuals. Surely most of it is spent on things like emergency shelter/food, immediate response equiptment, cleanup infrastructure, rebuilding public assets etc.

I would think at the end of the day the majority of those who suffered damage but were uninsured will have to pay for the repairs out of their own pocket. But that is only speculation, I don't know for sure.

 

[Scotty]

I understand that the Qld government will be announcing some details on this in the next day or so.

I expect individuals to get a reasonable amount, depending on their circumstances of course.

 

[Scotty]

http://media01.couriermail.com.au/extras/pageflipper/floodhelpguide/

Here you go. $14,200 for a family for homes damaged by the floods. Homes must be uninsured.
$5120 for contents for low income families.

This just the Qld government support.

 

[barbarian]

Surely it should depend on the extent of the damage? It seems a bit silly that someone whose whole house was underwater will get the same as soneone who had a bit of water damage to their basement carpet.

 

[Ruggo]

Some insurance companies offer flood insurance but with a clause that protects them from having to pay it if the flood was due to "rivers rising". Similar to the old "acts of god" clause that insurance companies use to peddle. Its an absolute scum bag move by the insurance company, but at the end of the day that is why you always have to be so careful and read the fine print.

From a business perspective, Suncorp have made a genius decision to publicly come out and say they will honour their claims. I know my old man's talking about switching to Suncorp out of principal, I expect many other Queenslanders might also follow suit.

This is what happened in the 1998 Australia Day floods of Katherine. TIO were the only insurance company to hounour claims. After a six month investigation it was concluded that water entered the town up through the drainage before it rose over the river bank in which it did. Flood claims were not honoured as damage was deemed to be caused by storm water damage. A lot of people were screwed on the technicalities hidden in the fine print.

It sounds like Suncorp are tuned in to local issues much as TIO is to issues in the NT.

 

[Moses]

So what is the point of insurance?

 

[Scotty]

Surely it should depend on the extent of the damage? It seems a bit silly that someone whose whole house was underwater will get the same as soneone who had a bit of water damage to their basement carpet.

I'm sure there are some assessments made.

 

[Ruggo]

Without sounding insensitive, those who chose not to insure should be held accountable for their actions. If the property could not be insured and the house is under finance, one has to ask why uninsurable property was able to be financed.

 

[Moses]

Perhaps those who did pay for insurance could have their premiums repaid, only up to 1974 of course

 

[Tangawizi]

James O'Connor has put the boots he wore during the Hong Kong Bledisloe up for sale on eBay to raise money for the flood appeal. Good lad. Hopefully his auction doesn't get hijacked by morons like a few others have been.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...for-flood-appeal/story-e6frepm6-1225991255483

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/James-OConno...U_Rugby_Union_Memorabilia&hash=item256093c7c1

 

[Jethro Tah]

Without sounding insensitive, those who chose not to insure should be held accountable for their actions. If the property could not be insured and the house is under finance, one has to ask why uninsurable property was able to be financed.

Good point Ruggo. You can bet your buttom dollar that banks will now only finance and refinance on a house with flood insurance.

 

[RugbyReg]

Without sounding insensitive, those who chose not to insure should be held accountable for their actions. If the property could not be insured and the house is under finance, one has to ask why uninsurable property was able to be financed.

we didn't have insurance. Partly because of the cost, partly because the council told us to build to certain levels to avoid 1 in 100 year floods. And we did. But we didn't, if you get my drift.

 

[Jets]

And then the rain started. It is bucketing down at my place at the moment. Not sure if this is good or bad for Brisbane. It might wash away some of the mud but it could also cause some flash flooding and slow down the clean up.

 

[Scotty]

we didn't have insurance. Partly because of the cost, partly because the council told us to build to certain levels to avoid 1 in 100 year floods. And we did. But we didn't, if you get my drift.

I see a high likelihood of a class action against council for people in your position.

 

[Ruggo]

The relief package is now before the parliament. Let's just see how many will cross the floor and support the package. I guess we will find out what is more important, the party or the electorates they are meant to represent.