tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post7602309211979795611..comments2024-03-28T09:22:36.967+13:00Comments on Offsetting Behaviour: EQNZ Lesson 1 for Wellington: Fix EQCEric Cramptonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15831696523324469713noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-16027516414830234372013-03-12T13:30:59.374+13:002013-03-12T13:30:59.374+13:00I've seen enough commenters in enough places c...I've seen enough commenters in enough places claiming to have bought insurance on bare land that it has to be possible. But it's not something that's currently obvious to do.<br /><br /><br />1. Make EQC premia scale with value at risk: houses with $10k in contents insurance have less risk than houses with $150k in contents.<br />2. Coordinate with insurers on publicising bare-land insurance packages.<br />3. Make sure everything is experience-rated for actual damage in this last quake: we know a lot more know about liquifaction risks and the like.Eric Cramptonhttp://offsettingbehaviour.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-50157103304139409062013-03-12T11:20:35.858+13:002013-03-12T11:20:35.858+13:00Goota say - while not personally affected by the e...Goota say - while not personally affected by the earthquake, I thought you made so many good point - especially the one about people not having to deal with EQC, after-all at heart, they are just a re-insurer. But - is there a problem with this proposal if most peoples damage is to their land rather than their buildings. (Insurance companies dont insure land but EQC does). Also wondering if the system needs to be made a little more fair by requiring people with just land and no buildings to pay EQC levies also (At the moment EQC only get paid if you have an insurance policy and people dont have insurance policies for land alone) - maybe through their rates?VMCnoreply@blogger.com