Home Insurance, Where are we headed ?

I'm a little late to this party, but will add my CDN experience.

I only had to tell my insurance guy what I had for heating. The original answer 20 years ago was a wood/oil combo boiler. No discussion of primary/secondary - seems as long as there was something that could function automatically, no issues. No more questions on wood.

Over the years, any further info sharing, questions, or policy update stuff (all originating from them) was concerned with the oil side. Mainly condition of the oil tank. (Which is another ball of worms all together...)

When I overhauled the heating system 3 years ago, I called them again before really getting into it to make sure what I was going to do was good. Which was electric boiler, and wood boiler, two separate units. Only comment then was make sure the boiler has a CSA sticker. So still no discussions of primary/secondary, or my chimney or inspections of it (they do know it is Stainless 7" 'Class A' from the original install 20 years ago). Not even any questions on it (new system) being professionally installed.

So I think as long as you have a heating source that can operate on its own (without a daily manual feeding), with a thermostat, there shouldn't really be much of an issue and it shouldn't really matter which gets used how much. Stoves (space heaters) may be different, not sure there.

I am frustrated that most blocks in my town have had at least one oil leak from an oil fired system.
Right now there is a remediation in progress costing > $500,000 (more than the purchase value of the two houses involved).
Yet oil heat does not incur an insurance premium, just mandated tank replacements, probably more often than needed.
I do not understand why the insurance companies are letting this go.

What's the tank replacement interval? Mine looks a little sad, probably none-too new. Of course, I thought the same of the two in my last house, in 1998... still holding without trouble.

dougstove said:

I am frustrated that most blocks in my town have had at least one oil leak from an oil fired system.
Right now there is a remediation in progress costing > $500,000 (more than the purchase value of the two houses involved).
Yet oil heat does not incur an insurance premium, just mandated tank replacements, probably more often than needed.
I do not understand why the insurance companies are letting this go.

Click to expand...

Yes indeed.

I thought I might get a break on my rates since I was getting rid of all my oil stuff. But that was not the case. Also asked my insurance fellow that one before I got into my changes - nope.

Thought that was a head scratcher...

Not sure what the typical interval is. Ours was 17 years old when I pulled it out, I think I was 'due' for a new one at 20 although it was still as solid after 17 years as when it was new. My parents had to get a new one put in around 8 years ago, when they changed insurance companies. They did that using a pro. Then the insurance company told them they had to replace it again, 6 years later. Sillyness.

Full of oil, I would think your oil tank not likely to have any hidden rust inside, so is it right to assume condition can be gauged entirely from outward appearance?

Oil tanks rust from the inside even if they are full of oil. There is no visual evidence until they start dripping or someone managed to accidently puncture them by pushing something underneath it.

maple1 said:

Yes indeed.

I thought I might get a break on my rates since I was getting rid of all my oil stuff. But that was not the case. Also asked my insurance fellow that one before I got into my changes - nope.

Thought that was a head scratcher...

Not sure what the typical interval is. Ours was 17 years old when I pulled it out, I think I was 'due' for a new one at 20 although it was still as solid after 17 years as when it was new. My parents had to get a new one put in around 8 years ago, when they changed insurance companies. They did that using a pro. Then the insurance company told them they had to replace it again, 6 years later. Sillyness.

Click to expand...

In the states most home owners insurance does not cover cleanup from a oil spill. Most folks don't realize they need to purchase additional insurance to cover that.

Keener said:

80% of that turns into heat inside your home ( less if you are forced to buy the idiotic florescent lights).
Here in B.C they are trying to do away with the incandescent bulbs which provide light and heat.

Click to expand...

Im stirring the pot on purpose

80%??? Try 98%.

Incandescent light bulbs are a 150 year old technology that is 2% efficient at its primary job of creating light. thats right, two percent. And has not changed significantly since it was first invented.

Just imagine if your car was 2% efficient. A 20 gallon fill up would barely make it to the nearest gas station to fill up again. People wouldn't stand for it, there would be rioting in the streets. But yet for some reason they get up in arms about replacing ancient lighing technology with something better, thats cheaper to operate, and has the double benefit of not making your air conditioning work harder in the summer (costing even more money)...

CFL is better but still only a stopgap... the real game changer is LED, and on sales I've been able to get LEDs for as low as $2 a piece. 1/10 the power consumption and 10 times the lifespan. whats not to like?

unless you just like flushing money down the drain...

unless you just like flushing money down the drain..

Click to expand...

In a net air-conditioning region, fair enough.
But we had a program in Canada to replace the incandescent light bulbs in Nunavut with CFL bulbs, when the electricity is generated by shipped in diesel and the houses are heated...electrically. Probably electric resistant heat powered by diesel-generated electricity is nuts in itself, but spending money to swap out incandescents for CFL was lipstick on a pig.

In my basement (baseline electric heat) there are only 5-10 days per year when I do not welcome some heat.
So in the continental USA, LED probably make unambiguous good sense almost everywhere. But in the great white north, the situation is more nuanced.

jharkin said:

Just imagine if your car was 2% efficient. A 20 gallon fill up would barely make it to the nearest gas station to fill up again. People wouldn't stand for it, there would be rioting in the streets. But yet for some reason they get up in arms about replacing ancient lighing technology with something better, thats cheaper to operate, and has the double benefit of not making your air conditioning work harder in the summer (costing even more money)...

Click to expand...

Gas costs real money, on the order of a few hundred dollars per month for most driving a less efficient vehicle. So does running AC. By comparison, the economics supporting more efficient lighting are very weak, and in my case actually negative.

Fair enough... I know in our case, switching most of the house to CFL and then LED didn't make a huge difference in the bills (TV, computers and that energy hog dehumidifier in the basement account for most of it) - but along with insulation it has allowed us to cool the the entire house in summer with just 3 bedroom size window AC's - where in the past it would have taken 4 or 5.

I know what you are saying about he payback... like other I pick my battles with them. My first LEDs where PAR30 downlights. Even at $20 a piece they where no brainers as they are the integrated trim type and I was replacing the can lights anyway, so vs $20 on a trim plus more for a bulb they where actually cheaper on day 1, and the lower power consumption helped with heat loss through the cathedral ceiling and reduced my ice damming.

Replacing 60 watt desk lamp fixtures I did more for the better color and lack of warm up time.

Some fixtures, like the exterior motion sensor floods I still use incan because like you say the savings is not there.



And to some extend I probably do it to feel better about being wasteful elsewhere, like commuting in a 19mpg truck, and listening to music on a vintage tube hi-fi, err space heater

Love those space heater stereos- much warmer sound and no clipping in the low end as is quite rampent with solid state. SS is much cleaner in the upper frequency ranges depending on the quality of the internal components.

Your truck gets 19 mpg?!?

<-- 13 mpg

Perhaps you need to review the rules about advertising on this forum.

BrotherBart said:

Or just pay off the joint and tell them to go pound sand like I did.

Click to expand...

I paid off my house after twelve years in 1997.

Three or four years ago, a stone kicked up by my power lawn mower broke the window in a neighbor's car across the street, and the insurance company paid the claim. Then they cancelled my insurance.

I've been carrying my own risk since then

wooduser said:

I've been carrying my own risk since then

Click to expand...

That takes some brass cahones. No worries of potential 6- or 7-figure liabilities?

A number of years ago my company ins. carrier refused to renew - underwritter didn't like the name of the company is what I was told. Ins cost have been steadily increasing to the point of $10 a day. ( ya 3600 /year) on a one man shop, and this isn't retail. Nor is it a stand alone building , I just rent space. The new carrier I got last year just sent a non-renewal letter ( no claims in 20 + years). Too bad as it was under $1000 for the year. My home insurance is almost double my property taxes and I definitely am not in an urban environment. Frankly I get better service from Guido down on the corner than the corporations.

wooduser said:

Three or four years ago, a stone kicked up by my power lawn mower broke the window in a neighbor's car across the street, and the insurance company paid the claim. Then they cancelled my insurance.

Click to expand...

Can you be a bit more descriptive on the cost of repair? I know side windows on cars can get pricey, with the power regulators and all, but how much over your deductible?

CaptSpiff said:

Can you be a bit more descriptive on the cost of repair? I know side windows on cars can get pricey, with the power regulators and all, but how much over your deductible?

Click to expand...

I didn't pay a deductible, since it wasn't my property that was damaged.

Similarly, the neighbor made a claim under their auto insurance policy and that insurance company presumably got paid off by my homerowner's insurance company. I never saw a bill.


What does it cost to replace a side window in a car ----perhaps a power window? I'd guess several hundred dollars.

wooduser said:

I didn't pay a deductible, since it wasn't my property that was damaged.

Similarly, the neighbor made a claim under their auto insurance policy and that insurance company presumably got paid off by my homerowner's insurance company. I never saw a bill.

Click to expand...

I get it: subrogation. I've dealt with that. I was not aware the deductible was not always in play.

pen said:

My buddy has owned 2 homes with entirely wood heat, but they were outside boilers. He had no problems.

Another only has his wood stove, but had a large enough electric service panel that he was able to add baseboard electric to the home for back-up, unexpected trips out of town, etc. I'll have to ask him if doing that saved him on insurance.

In all, I can't suggest any companies as I'm not familiar with those in Canada, but would recommend shopping around.

Click to expand...

We have electrical baseboard heaters with the wood stove being primary heat, it was very difficult for us to find an insurance policy for our house. Admittedly the stove that was in the house when we bought it was from 1975. We just replaced it a few days ago, but we had to take a second floor deck off of the house for repairs, so we will wait to tell insurance about the new stove until we finish fixing the house. Eventually we plan on getting a mini split so we can claim it along with the baseboard heat as our primary heat, and say the wood stove is supplemental. This should save us a lot on insurance.

DougA said:

The OP is Cdn. - that says it all.

Here's the problem in Canada and some other jurisdictions. Insurance companies do not want to insure higher risk homes since they may actually have a loss. They want to insure good people who will not have a loss. Wood heat is considered 'borderline'. They will insure it if you have the wood heat system inspected by a WETT certified tech. If you pass inspection and the house burns down due to your wood stove, the insurance company then claims the loss from the WETT inspector's insurance. Do you smell a scam???

So ... you need to install a few electric baseboard heaters which is your 'primary heat'. This should cost under $100. Set them on as low as possible and they should cost zero in hydro but they will come on in an emergency if the wood stove fails and the hydro is still working. Smell another scam??

Tell the insurance that you burn less than 3 cords of firewood and that your primary heat is electric.

Problem solved. You owe me a beer - payable next time I'm in BC. Not likely anytime soon.

Click to expand...

Our insurance didn't care about our baseboard heaters. My wife didn't want to say they were primary heat, mainly because they can't be in this climate, but she lied about our dogs to secure the policy. This woman drives me crazy sometimes!

Ashful said:

Your truck gets 19 mpg?!?

<-- 13 mpg

Click to expand...

I'm averaging 22-23 in my 06 six speed ram 3500 4x4 quad cab Dually long bed. That's mixed town and rural roads!

SpaceBus said:

Our insurance didn't care about our baseboard heaters. My wife didn't want to say they were primary heat, mainly because they can't be in this climate, but she lied about our dogs to secure the policy. This woman drives me crazy sometimes!

Click to expand...

That is not making sense to me. In many homes, baseboard is the only source of heat. So when going to the insurance company, that should be termed primary, and the stove secondary.