cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/181313
The shell of a burned car in front of a home that narrowly missed the Pacific Palisades fire earlier this year.
From NYT > Top Stories via this RSS feed
Sounds like, at least with the prior rate hike, it’s not a flat increase, but reflects risk in a given area: higher risk areas are seeing larger hikes.
https://uphelp.org/state-farm-raising-insurance-rates-20-for-california-customers-in-new-year/
Joel Laucher from United Policyholders, a consumer advocacy group, says folks should shop around for coverage amid the changes.
“Really the way that plays out, it may be a 3% or 4% rate increase for someone in a more urban and less wildfire exposed area. And it could be a 40% or a 50% rate increase for the population that owns homes in [wildfire impacted areas],” he said.
That variability is probably what you’d expect if the increase is economically-efficient, but just saying that someone may be more-impacted or less-impacted than the given percent increase.
