Homeowner's insurance vs. shale
Are there any things we should watch out for in our homeowner's insurance vs. shale?
The scenario I'm thinking about is something like:
Your home is insured for $250,000. Let's assume your mineral rights are worth another $250,000. Your home gets destroyed in a fire. The insurance company says, "We'll pay you $250,000, but we want title to your home, land, and mineral rights. Sort of like having your car totaled, and the insurance company pays you the value of the car, but takes possession.
Now, I realize that this isn't the way homeowner's insurance works. If you're insured for $250,000, that's the amount of money you would get to rebuild. (At least I think that's the way it work.)
Consider this as an example of an unexpected result in insurance. Are there any "legitimate" gotchas in homeowner's insurance that someone who suddenly finds their mineral rights are worth a significant amount of money?
One thing I can think of is that, since you now have a large, visible asset that can be seized, you're more of a target for predatory frivolous lawsuits.
The scenario I'm thinking about is something like:
Your home is insured for $250,000. Let's assume your mineral rights are worth another $250,000. Your home gets destroyed in a fire. The insurance company says, "We'll pay you $250,000, but we want title to your home, land, and mineral rights. Sort of like having your car totaled, and the insurance company pays you the value of the car, but takes possession.
Now, I realize that this isn't the way homeowner's insurance works. If you're insured for $250,000, that's the amount of money you would get to rebuild. (At least I think that's the way it work.)
Consider this as an example of an unexpected result in insurance. Are there any "legitimate" gotchas in homeowner's insurance that someone who suddenly finds their mineral rights are worth a significant amount of money?
One thing I can think of is that, since you now have a large, visible asset that can be seized, you're more of a target for predatory frivolous lawsuits.
Views: 35
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by sesport on
-
Thanks intrepid & everyone else.
My POV on this is from two different perspectives. One, as a surface/mineral owner. Of course, we can't cover all scenarios here so perhaps it's best to start talking to the homeowners'/liability company about the details in the policy.
The other perspective is from the POV of the "gated communities" in this neck of our woods, typically governed by a homeowners' association whose members/stakeholders are all the surface owners in the neighborhood.. Now we're talking about liability coverage for common areas, streets, recreational features, and more. Again, what additional coverage MAY be needed and/or how to protect the asset from being included in an award.
Lotto food for thought since IANAL nor an insurance agent. lol
thanks again - :0)
-
Permalink Reply by intrepid on
-
One thing I can think of is that, since you now have a large, visible asset that can be seized, you're more of a target for predatory frivolous lawsuits.
The defendant always feels the lawsuit is frivolous.
How is the tort climate in La. these days? In Texas it's pretty cool toward plaintiff's.
-
Permalink Reply by intrepid on
-
Personal Injury litigation got out of hand in the early 80's in Texas and like I told my plaintiff lawyer friend's, they really did kill the goose that laid their golden egg.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
Fishing and Hunting Group
110 members
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Miller County, Arkansas
27 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
South Caddo Parish Group
440 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
400 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
244 members
-
Fayetteville Shale
149 members
-
North Caddo Parish
358 members
-
Central Texas Gas
63 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
