That's been standard operating procedure here in California for quite a long time. I'm pretty sure it is a state law the insurance companies have to send a notice indicating that you are/are not covered for earthquakes, typically with the renewal notice.

Read the fine print, I know one of the exclusions in my policy is that they won't pay out if my home is destroyed by nuclear weapons... :eek:, bastaaads

Earthquake coverage was not included in my homeowner's insurance. I had to purchase a separate policy for that. I think it was the Northridge quake that almost broke the bank for the insurance companies. They basically said, we are not going to offer earthquake coverage any longer.

The State of California stepped in and created the California Earthquake Authority who now issues these policies. I have no idea how solvent this entity is, the whole State is on th everge of bankruptcy. They carry a 10% deductible and a maximum liability limit. Many, many people out here have made a conscious decision to not carry this coverage even though it is offered.

Not carrying the coverage makes you "self insured". It's not their problem. You cannot credibly argue that it is.

The real fear for me is fire. If your house is knocked off its foundation or falls down, the "stuff" is still there and can be retrieved. If the quake breaks a gas pipe (furnace, water heater, main,...) and a fire starts, your "stuff" will be gone, gone, gone. Given this risk of a secondary fire, be sure your earthquake/emergency supplies are stored separately/safely.

Touches on the fact that most of the damage from quakes isn't from the quake itself. Rather it is the secondary damages from fire, floods, etc.

Just like in a tornado or hurricane, it usually isn't the wind so much as the stuff blowing around in the wind.

I wonder if the eastern states will now enact senate bills to require seismically retrofitting critical services structures as they did in CA with senate bill SB1953. Not to the same extent but at least to give some resistance to expected maximum lateral forces from quakes in that region. Right now, if I understand correctly, there's almost no real structural code standards that address this issue, and if there is, it might not be to actual maximum loads as experienced in this last quake.
That will mean a lot of new design and construction jobs for many AE and construction firms who are presently suffering from lack of work. That could also stimulate the economy on that side of the country.

Chombi

One can only hope, says this PE who specializes in nonlinear structural analysis. Actually NYDOT is already a bit ahead of game with some of their bridges, but the ground motions they are using are a pittance compared to some of the motions i've used on structures here. I will be interested in seeing the recorded ground motions from this latest quake.

Where's the thrill in that?

Hospital designs we've been doing in the past decade CA are supposed to withstand about 7+ richter tremblors. Some are now thinking that structural seismic requirements should be upped again to deal with eathquakes in magnitudes recently felt in Japan (8+).....Many are also worried about tsunami damage for coastal facilities (and theres lots of it in CA), after seeing what it did in Japan. I don't think that is even adressed in any way yet these days........ Next thing you know, we'll be doing designs that will withstand the sun going supernova on us or a mile wide asteriod hitting the planet??!

Chombi

LOL! No lie.

I am lucky. Even though I live near the beach, I have a buffer against a tsunami, as my house is about 100' above MSL. It's not a lot but it's something. The thing is, I am surrounded by lower areas which, if flooded by a tsunami, will create a large salt lake when the water recedes. <-- not good. Even though my home may stay dry, I may need a boat to commute to work, at least until it evaporates/soaks in. :)

I heard that it was felt a little bit here even(live in Michigan) but I didn't feel it myself. Have been in a couple when I lived in Tacoma, though.... pretty freaky