2 -2/3 cords too much for insurance? more Cdn BS

[DougA]

Sounds to me like you might be overestimating your wood use.

ummmm, yes, of course. I will not post my wood shed photos.
In all honesty, I am not counting. Whatever it takes to keep me warm is what it takes.

 

[bag of hammers]

Back when I originally installed my 1st stove they asked for the Warnock / Hersey tag and some pics. Non issue for 10 years or so, added stove # 2 and same deal - pics and tag. Then a couple years back they said I need WETT inspection. Nothing changed in my install they just changed their requirements. Checked with other brokers and companies and they were all demanding WETT. I hired the guy to do the inspection, zero issues found I suspect it may be more about insurance companies transferring risk vs reducing risk. Maybe they can hang liability on the WETT guy if you have a house fire, etc. Also asked how much I burn each year. I'm a weekend / vacation time burner so I don't run through much more than 1 or 1-1/2 full cord in a year. They ding me for being a fair distance from nearest fireball (a volunteer unit).

 

[Woodfarmer1]

I've never been asked how much wood I burnt when I had an insert and wood stove going full time, used 5 cord per season.
The WETT certified inspector is similar to a vehicle safety, in that the stove install has been inspected by a qualified technician.
Insurance companies are just trying to limit the risk.

 

[jb6l6gc]

i told mine i have stove adjusted rate asked no questions at all gotta luv quebec

Ya thankfully my company I had reinstate my policy is dejardins from Quebec all they asked is it wett certified I said yes and asked if they wanted reports and said no worries. Lol asked them about a stove in my shop and they said no prob too $12 a yr rider lmao

 

[BobUrban]

I have worked in the PnC insurance industry for years and still do not completely understand it they like to keep things on the tune of "Rubics Cube" as far as understanding what is and is not covered and also love to create caveats to allow an "out" or "right to deny" a claim.

1. Best option is to have things in writing and BEST best is to have the policy reviewed by an attorney or licensed insurance agent other than your own because insurance language is of it's own dialect and even agents struggle with understanding the small print(at least some do)

2. Make sure your policy is written on SPECIAL form coverage as apposed to BROAD or BASIC form. ALL of your policy!! And get this in writing. In this day and age it is rather simple - all you need is an email!! Make sure you communicate with your agent via email and ask simple questions that require simple answers such as: My entire policy is written with special form coverage including any loss or losses related to the wood heat appliance? Once you receive an answer of YES stop asking questions PRINT and SAVE the entire email chain.

as mentioned in another post with special form coverage the burden is on the insurance company to find a reason to deny - not on the insured to prove coverage. If the policy does not state it isn't covered - IT IS!! Further more there are laws in place to protect the consumer(insured) due to the language and you actually are not required to read or understand the forms - that responsibility is on your agent. If you ask for specific protection and your agent says you have it - YOU HAVE IT!! This is covered under the agents EandO coverage. ie. Errors and Omissions - they lie they pay - 100% of the time. This is why you save the email - extra insurance for you. The law is on your side.

The first line of defense is what you are doing now and using the internet to research different companies by asking real people their real life experience in the event of a loss. Do some Google work and find a company that has a reputation of timely claims management in regards to the exposures(losses) you wish to protect against. This will save you a lot of headaches if a loss does occur.

Not all insurance companies are bad - just like not all lawyers are bad - but MANY are. Do your homework and DO NOT leave it up to an agent alone unless it is a seriously trusted confidant that has your best interest in mind.

***I am licensed in the US so Canadian law may be different - do your homework accordingly.

 

[Mainely Saws]

Just out of curiosity , what is the definition of " aux " heat ? Is it heat to help out the primary heat during very cold weather or is it heat used when the primary heat has a failure or there is a power outage ?

 

[DougA]

Aux. is supposed to be to help out the primary heater.

My understanding is that the questionnaire is something that all insurance companies in Canada are now doing when you do a new install. Years ago, my agent came out, took photos and that was it. Then it was WETT inspection about 10 yrs. back, now it's WETT, photos, plus full information. My real question is how many cords do most people use when they are burning for aux. or supplemental heat? I still think 2 to 3 cords is not much. If I was heating my whole house with wood only, I'd be double that or more.

I've got electric heat and the electric usage has not gone down surprising much but that's because I've been burning for 30 yrs and this winter and last have been really cold.

 

[Oldman47]

I see statements that the proof of what you have been doing, in the event of a claim, lies with the insurance company. So what? In 10 minutes I could call the local utility or oil supplier and find out how much fuel or power you are using. When the power company says they supply only about the same amount in winter as you used in May or October, how are you going to refute the assertion that you are using primarily wood heat? I am sure the lawyers working for the insurance company know a lot more than I do about how they could prove you rely on wood heat but even with maybe 2 minutes to think about it I can see a pretty easy way for them to dispute your usage estimate on the application if you ever have a claim. Frankly, in my experience, it never pays to lie to folks. Sooner or later it will catch up with you.

 

[BobUrban]

I see statements that the proof of what you have been doing, in the event of a claim, lies with the insurance company. So what? In 10 minutes I could call the local utility or oil supplier and find out how much fuel or power you are using. When the power company says they supply only about the same amount in winter as you used in May or October, how are you going to refute the assertion that you are using primarily wood heat? I am sure the lawyers working for the insurance company know a lot more than I do about how they could prove you rely on wood heat but even with maybe 2 minutes to think about it I can see a pretty easy way for them to dispute your usage estimate on the application if you ever have a claim. Frankly, in my experience, it never pays to lie to folks. Sooner or later it will catch up with you.

Ding Ding Ding!! They have the tools to verify usage pretty simply so lying on you part is a sure bet to get denied.

Again, I repeat, get your agent to say yes and print it - it then fall back on them in the event of a claim.

 

[DougA]

I don't think I lied since that is the amount I normally burn. I did copy the forms after I filled them in and they're on file. The other notes I added to the form was the 2 errors the WETT inspector made on his report. Since he was technically wrong, I had to make a note since I knew about it. The agent seemed OK with that. The errors related to how he used both the flat wall installation specs plus the corner installation specs in combination. I called Hearthstone and they said you use one or the other, never combined. Just goes to show the depth of knowledge of the inspectors the insurance companies rely upon.

The very first thing out of his mouth was, "I can tell you right now that this is a fail, this stove is not ULC certified" I pointed out the ULC approval on the plate and he was not happy. I did my homework through this forum, knew the specs. and made sure the install was better then code.

I will report back if the insurance has a problem.

 

[Offset]

I see statements that the proof of what you have been doing, in the event of a claim, lies with the insurance company. So what? In 10 minutes I could call the local utility or oil supplier and find out how much fuel or power you are using. When the power company says they supply only about the same amount in winter as you used in May or October, how are you going to refute the assertion that you are using primarily wood heat? I am sure the lawyers working for the insurance company know a lot more than I do about how they could prove you rely on wood heat but even with maybe 2 minutes to think about it I can see a pretty easy way for them to dispute your usage estimate on the application if you ever have a claim. Frankly, in my experience, it never pays to lie to folks. Sooner or later it will catch up with you.

Not sure I agree with you on this. First of all auxiliary heat could in fact be primary heat in one or two rooms depending on the layout of your home. My stove has an impact on the thermostat for my electric heat, in theory it will keep the baseboard heaters from coming on just because of it placement or proximity to the stove. No matter what you are always going to use more power be it electrical or some from of gas in the winter. Depending on how well your house is constructed will have a significant impact on usage of any source of power including wood.

I agree with you that honesty is the best policy but it seems like a very one sided arrangement. Do insurance companies ask how much natural gas for example you use? If so do they want you to stop using it once that estimation is reached? There have been some years when we have not used much wood at all, but if it is cold what are your options? I believe I gave a very honest answer to my insurance company about usage. It strikes me that it is more important how that wood is used in a safe environment where the home owner takes care of their equipment. Not sure that happens with other forms of heating equipment.

 

[jb6l6gc]

I see statements that the proof of what you have been doing, in the event of a claim, lies with the insurance company. So what? In 10 minutes I could call the local utility or oil supplier and find out how much fuel or power you are using. When the power company says they supply only about the same amount in winter as you used in May or October, how are you going to refute the assertion that you are using primarily wood heat? I am sure the lawyers working for the insurance company know a lot more than I do about how they could prove you rely on wood heat but even with maybe 2 minutes to think about it I can see a pretty easy way for them to dispute your usage estimate on the application if you ever have a claim. Frankly, in my experience, it never pays to lie to folks. Sooner or later it will catch up with you.

Not too sure they would be so willing to just hand over a customers usage information as its against the law here for them to do that!

 

[billb3]

The utilities have proof of nothing.
They have data that can be interpreted.
You could be using no oil, no gas, no electric for heat and freezing your nuts off living under blankets.

 

[rideau]

And at Hydroone rates you probably would be!

 

[DougA]

And at Hydroone rates you probably would be!

Ah but the gov't says that the rates are not very high. It's only your invoice that is too high!

 

[BradleyW]

Maybe I'm missing something, and I'm a little late to the thread, but why does wood have to be an auxiliary source of heat? Is that a requirement of the insurance company or the government?

 

[blades]

Depends on locality, State building codes, and yes the mindset of the ins co. You could have 1k propane tank out back at x distance from the home for primary heat - Ins won't say a thing - if that tank goes so does the house- or how about a 250 gal oil tank in the basement ( used to be very common)- that's ok too , don't know where they stand on 2 ton of coal feeding your furnace or boiler that used to be common also and that was fine, but oh goodness a wood stove/furnace eek!!. Its all perception by a bunch of desk jockeys that haven't a clue real world wise. Case in point- My previous ins co for my shop got a new underwriter- In this case a wet behind the ears female was the reviewer for the under writing of the policy- took exception to the name of the shop denied coverage on that basis alone. The particular word in question was "Blades" and has been part of the name since 1936. Go Figure. Oh it was suggested to change the name- why would I do that to a company this old ?

 

[KB007]

If they are giving you that kind of grief, start shopping around. When we moved to Ottawa, there was a wood stove downstairs. They wanted to see it inspected and charged me $40 a year for the extra coverage (State Farm). When I replaced it, they wanted to see the wett cert. Same with the Insert in our LR. Only thing they asked was if it was the "primary" heat source and I said no, I have hi eff propane furnace. Some companies just won't write policies for wood heat as primary heat source. Shop around, be honest. Karma can be a biotch.

 

[Swedishchef]

I too am a little late in the thread but here's my 2 cents:

Insurance companies are private. You have the "privilege" to deal with them. If you don't like their policies, don't deal with them. They make their cost calculations based on risk and on the number of claims. And with that risk, we pay more. For example, I do NOT have a fire hydrant within 200 feet of my house; I do not have any within 10 KM of my house. I do have a local small firehall with a tanker truck inside 1/2 a mile away. I understand that SHOULD my house catch fire, it'll simply be a great show (provided everyone is out) because there is NO WAY a fire department will make it in time to save any of it. And if they do, they'll likely run out of water.

That being said, I do not think we see many news articles relating to electric heater fires burning down a house. Lots of stove fires burning them down though. I am not saying it is normal; normally it's user error (wood is too wet, poor stove installation, stack, ashes stored in a bucket indoors, etc). But insurance companies pay them out. So the next stove setup that comes alone - POOF. higher premiums. A friend of mine has a 145 year old house. All his insurance will cover is $150 000 of rebuild costs..that's it. The wiring, plumbing, insulation is all deemed "too risky".

My stove costs me an extra $100 a year in insurance. And it's considered a supplemental heat supply. I told them I burn between 2-3 cords a year. They simply asked if I had it installed by a certified installer and told them yes. That was it. Nothing else.

I'd shop around and consider going elsewhere if they give you too much grief. And whatever you do, do not lie. I have had family members get bit in the a$$ with insurance companies for that (a distant relative used to drive his car for work and he had told the insurance company he did not...guess what; accident during a work trip, they didn't cover it).

Andrew

 

[tarzan]

Insurance companies just want the odds in there favor that the only money to exchange hands is from yours to theres. I'm sure they base there decisions on past experience where they had to pay.

I still agree with oldman that honesty is the best policy but at this point in my life I'm not sure why I do!

Setting here thinking of all the times I screwed myself by simply being honest in dealing with people.

 

[DougA]

Maybe I'm missing something, and I'm a little late to the thread, but why does wood have to be an auxiliary source of heat? Is that a requirement of the insurance company or the government?

The insurance company requires it. I suspect that they will either not insure or up the premiums if you heat primarily with wood. House insurance is mandatory if you have a mortgage. A mortgage is mandatory if you are not stinking rich. How can I get stinking rich if I have to pay for mortgage interest plus insurance???

I'd shop around and consider going elsewhere if they give you too much grief.

My understanding is that all insurance companies in Canada now require a WETT inspection plus full information package on new installs so you cannot go elsewhere. You may have installed yours prior to this coming into effect, some comapnies may be rolling this out more slowly or you may be in Quebec which may or may not be in Canada. .

Insurance is all about actuaries and numbers. Wood stoves have proven to cause house fires. Electrical heaters also cause house fires. Actually, neither cause house fires, stupid people operating them cause the fires. Insurance companies can control the risk of wood stoves by insisting upon inspections and questionnaires designed to limit risk. They can't control idiots that buy a heater at a Wallymart and overload a circuit or have it operating in a dangerous environment.
If insurance could find a way to raise prices for idiots, I believe everyone on this forum would be entitled to a big discount.

 

[DougA]

Just thought of something. I should have added to my form that I have been granted a "Minister of Fire" degree. Do ya think it would help?

For 10 bucks, this forum should offer a fancy degree we can hang on our walls certifying us a wood pyromaniac.

 

[tarzan]

LOL! Yes, you should inform your insurance company that you are an official Minister Of Fire

 

[Thislilfishy]

We added our woodstove this last fall. My wife called our insurance to update our policy to be safe. The conversation sorta went like this:

Insurance: was your stove professionally installed?

Wife: Yup, we had Napoleon do all the work. Still waiting for the WETT forms to come back from them though.

Insurance: Okay great, it's $50/year more and we'll add it to your policy.

Background: Bark bark bark bark bark.

Insurance: Is that your dog barking.

Wife: Yeah, he's a real mouthpiece, but more or less harmless.

Insurance; Oh, we don't show a dog on your policy, that's odd.

Me thinking: aww crap here we go....

Insurance; We'll add that to your policy, it should SAVE you about $5/year

Wife: what? Why?

Insurance: well we consider it a form of security. People are less likely to break into a home with a large dog, which out weighs the risk of the dog harming a person or other property these days.

So there you go...something you can check up on. Basically it all comes down to the insurance company. Keep looking if 2.5 cord is and issue. With this winter being so cold we are looking at 4.5 cord.

I would think there would be a premium on using wood as you primary heat would be due to the extra risk of damage from water damage from frozen pipes if the stove if left unattended. Not withstanding the possible increase of fire damage I guess.

Ian

 

[tarzan]

Our home owners insurance company has a long list of dog breeds that they don't allow you to have.

I can't remember the list now but I remember several large breeds on it.