Is It Time to Consider Earthquake Insurance?

Back to HomePage
Posted: 1:24 PM Aug 24, 2011 Is It Time to Consider Earthquake Insurance? Insurance that covers earthquake damage is not something many homeowners in the Commonwealth have considered, that is until Tuesday. But is it necessary? Reporter: Rachel Ryan Email Address: rachel.ryan@newsplex.com

Font Size:

August 24, 2011

Insurance that covers earthquake damage is not something many homeowners in the Commonwealth have considered, that is until Tuesday.

Homeowner's insurance doesn't typically cover earthquake damage. Although, in the case of Tuesday's 5.8 magnitude quake, insurance agent Bob Short says having the extra coverage might not have done you any good.

"It's really designed for catastrophic major events. All of the earthquake coverages, if the consumer were to buy it, carry a percentage deductible," said Short, president of Short Insurance.

Earthquake coverage on a $500,000 home would cost $375 a year, according to Short. Plus, there's typically a $10,000 minimum deductible, meaning quake insurance won't be much help unless your home sustains significant damage.

Coverage also depends on how your house was built. Frame homes are less expensive to insure because they have more sway and bend and don't suffer as much damage as a brick home would in the event of an earthquake.

Latest Comments

Posted by: Steve Hull Location: Charlottesville on Aug 25, 2011 at 02:54 AM

When I moved here 10 years ago we bought Earthquake Insurance and have kept it ever since. It is cheap compared with California. Since I moved here I have felt a small quake about every 2 years. Without it (just like flood insurance) your regular policy won't pay a penny without it. I am personally looking forward my rebuilt brand new house when a larger quake (or many smaller quakes) destroys my foundation with my $8K deductible :)

Click here to post or read all 1 comments.