Why were all the RV's left in the flood?

[TNGW1500SE]

I understand that sometimes you can't move an RV when the water is coming up but it looks like there's a lot of RV's that were just left to flood. I mine were there I'd have moved it up the road and out of the coming flood. Maybe some people didn't have gas money??? It would be cheaper on the insurance company to give the people 300 bucks for gas to move it. When there's this much warning, it seems like a bunch of them could have been moved.

[tatest]

Move them where? It is a long way to high ground and Gulf Coast hurricanes tend to move a long distance inland.

The Texas coastal plain stretches inland to roughly I-35. When only a few tens of thousands of folks evacuated west for Rita the 200 miles to San Antonio became a 12-hour drive. The highway to Dallas took even longer, and the hurricane followed those folks to Dallas.

Forecasters can only roughly predict the path or how far it will get before losing energy and drying out. Hurricane Agnes (1972) hit the Gulf Coast at western Florida, got all the way up to drown Corning, New York. If you went north on that evacuation, it was the wrong direction.

[riven1950]

Lots of speculation here folks. I've been paying Federal Flood insurance premiums on various houses for over 30 years. Current home premium started at about 175.00 years ago, now about 1400.00 with a 5000.00 deductible. Premium on the coast is based on how high your finished floor is above the 100 yr flood level. I think it is the same for rivers that flood.

Someone said Obama reduced premiums and did refunds. Not here folks. Premiums have steadily gone up over the years, no refund ever. Also, I've never received a dime even though flooded 3 times, last being last September. The floods didn't reach the first floor living area. After doing repairs last year at my expense I figured I could claim it on my taxes as a casualty loss at least. Well, surprise surprise, causualty losses are allowed only if they exceed a % of income, so no help there either.

Also:

I don't think you can get Rv flood insurance through the Federal program. Only S&B structures.

I do believe you can purchase Federal Flood if you are not in a flood plain. It would not cost you more ( as someone stated ).

Here on NC coast my HO insurance does not even cover wind damage anymore. I have a seperate wind and hail policy, a HO policy, and a flood insurance policy.

BTW last fall when the hurricane hit us we went camping about 150 mile to the west but our population is no where near what Texas was dealing with, plus as someone said, they are having a 500year flood.

I have been through several hurricanes and evacuated 7 or 8 times. I still can't begin to imagine the problems these folks are facing. Please don't blame these folks for living in a coastal area. All parts of the country seem to have some sort of weather related hazards. I do hope they require the rebuilt structures to be built above the flood plain. s

[mike-s]

valhalla360 wrote:
Actually,
- if you don't live in a river flood plane, floods are a non-issue.

That's not really true. If nothing else, it's an issue because you're still going to end up paying for floods.

"Flood plane" is usually understood to mean a 1%/year chance of flooding ("100 year"). In those areas, pretty much any house with a mortgage is required by law to have federal flood insurance. But that program is broken and not self-supporting. They didn't charge enough, so premiums are insufficient to support payouts.

Obama signed a bill in 2014 which deliberately kept premiums low and even refunded some premiums. All of that amounts to a subsidy to those who chose to live in a flood plane, which is nothing but encouraging bad behavior. The government is still on the hook, so it will get a bailout paid for by all taxpayers.

But, much of the flooding in Houston goes well past that - beyond even the "500 year" flood plane. So it's not just those who "live in a river flood plane." That's a bit different - they could have bought flood insurance, but didn't. That, to me, was a risk/reward decision they made, and it would be wrong to bail them out now. But I'm sure there will be lots of pressure to do just that, since a lot of the cost will be borne by corporate mortgage lenders. If equity is less than the repair cost, lots of owners are going to just walk away, even if it requires bankruptcy.

[valhalla360]

fj12ryder wrote:
Hey, I see a safe place way inland: Oklahoma...oops, earthquakes, tornadoes, and floods. Okay, Kansas, Missouri, and Iowa, all way inland so must be safe...oops again, floods and tornadoes. Okay, Colorado, oops...avalanches, tornadoes, floods, and forest fires.

Gosh, what's a person to do except suck it up.

Actually,
- if you don't live in a river flood plane, floods are a non-issue.
- All the tornadoes in all the states you listed for the last 20yrs don't come close to the number of homes destroyed by this one storm.
- No avalanches in Denver.

rxji is overly harsh but yes building in coastal areas really does need to be limited and done with natural disasters in mind.

For example, we took the boat down the River system from Chicago to Mobile. There were newer homes in the flood plane along many of the rivers but they were built on stilts ranging from 8-20' high. I'm sure it added to the construction costs but it changes a flood from a total devastation of the house to a nuisance and that's how it should be. It still bugs the heck out of me that they rebuilt many parts of New Orleans knowing full well the next storm is likely to destroy those same houses.

[fj12ryder]

It's probably a good thing we're not as smart as you. Otherwise we'd all be living on that same 5 acres, you know, the ones with no trees.

[azrving]

fj12ryder wrote:
Hey, I see a safe place way inland: Oklahoma...oops, earthquakes, tornadoes, and floods. Okay, Kansas, Missouri, and Iowa, all way inland so must be safe...oops again, floods and tornadoes. Okay, Colorado, oops...avalanches, tornadoes, floods, and forest fires.

Gosh, what's a person to do except suck it up.

No one can come up with a perfect spot but one can avoid may of the worst spots. If you have shopped property in the Houston area or just browse flood maps it's easy to realize that the population density is planted in the worst possible area. When shopping for property even when a realtor sends a suggestion is to go straight to the flood maps.

If you shop to the north you find some of the worst twisters. We dont shop and say give me the Tow vehicle that breaks the most or give me the TT with the most frame cracking issues. Probability.

I had property that had very low history of any natural damage but there were risks associated with it. It had sand soil so there was the risk of large trees easily blowing over and killing you in your house. What do you do? I cut down the species that were most known to blow over and the ones closest to the house. So what happens then? A wind storm comes through and people are killed by trees hitting their house or mobile home. Risk, reward, probability. Smarter ones cut the trees down.

[azrving]

Worst

Density

[fj12ryder]

Hey, I see a safe place way inland: Oklahoma...oops, earthquakes, tornadoes, and floods. Okay, Kansas, Missouri, and Iowa, all way inland so must be safe...oops again, floods and tornadoes. Okay, Colorado, oops...avalanches, tornadoes, floods, and forest fires.

Gosh, what's a person to do except suck it up.

[toedtoes]

2 Retired wrote:
Reality, that's why! So many reports on just how fast the water rose, and how so many were left w/o ways to get away. Don't think it was a matter of "I have insurance so no problem". A number of these RVs were the only homes for those who lived in them. These people now have NOTHING. a "flash flood" by definition is one that occurs so fast escaping is dangerous. If I had to choose between getting my family out safely or taking the time to 'break camp', hook up the RV and increase the possibility of being in harm's way, I would also leave my RV behind. So many have stated that their homes were flooded, waist-high, in a matter of minutes. Many times, roads flood before homes do as well. By the time an RV owner realized his rig was in danger, it is likely he would be faced with impassable roads. This is no time for recriminations or finger-pointing or blame. As my Mom always told me: "Don't assume you know what the situation is for someone else. You aren't there!"

Very nicely said. 🙂

[azrving]

Triker33 wrote:
Fact! In the coming months they will be bargain prices for buying used RV's.
Hint!! Don't buy one before inspecting it. 🙂

AND so may wonderful used cars to choose from. Yee haa

[Triker33]

Fact! In the coming months they will be bargain prices for buying used RV's.
Hint!! Don't buy one before inspecting it. 🙂

[mgirardo]

Last year we had to evacuate because of Hurricane Matthew. We were gone within a few hours of the posting of a Mandatory Evacuation. The posting was a little more than 36 hours before the Hurricane was to be in our area. We packed up the motorhome and drove west about 175 miles. We live in a county with a little more than 100,000 people. Traffic was moving along the evacuation route pretty well when not going through larger towns. It would have been a completely different story if there were 6.5 million people trying to evacuate.

We had the luxury of driving a 1/4 mile and picking up our motorhome from storage, packing it up and going. Now that we own a large TT that we leave at our seasonal site year 'round about 800 miles from home, it would be hard to drop everything, get to our TT and move it to safety. It's a 12 hour drive without traffic to get to our TT. Once I got there, I'd evacuate west, which means trying to get through Philadelphia traffic which is terrible at 10 am on a Sunday. It would be bumper to bumper for hours and hours on end. It would be pointless to even try.

We'd just hope for the best.

-Michael

[valhalla360]

MrWizard wrote:
a lot of those nice pretty 5vrs, belong to seasonal snowbirds
they went north to the stick house, when the weather got hot,
they werent there to move it

2x

There may be the stray person playing the insurance game but especially along the coast and the RGV, the owners are likely a 1000 miles or more away.

[2012Coleman]

TNGW1500SE wrote:
I understand that sometimes you can't move an RV when the water is coming up

You answered your own question. Put yourself in their shoes - what would be more important to you "when the water is coming up"? Your family/life or your RV?

Oh and I'm sure that lots of people saw an opportunity to collect on insurance - yea right...

[MrWizard]

isn't 'flood insurance' something for Property that can't be moved
a stick or brick home, a business

the topic was/is about RV's
you get vehicle insurance you get comprehensive / collision etc.. maybe even include an add to your home owners, but I Don't think you buy flood insurance for an RV, i recon for a TT or 5vr your home owners comprehensive for personal property gives coverage