JUDGE APPROVES FIRE DAMAGES SETTLEMENT

kiwijims · Guru

JUDGE APPROVES FIRE DAMAGES SETTLEMENT

SnowT · Guru

yep real good..

500,000,000.00 / 10,000 == $50,000 split-on an even basis.

does that cover the fact that most can't afford to rebuild due to the harder building laws..??

Juergen

What one hand give the other takes away....

-- Edited by SnowT on Tuesday 23rd of December 2014 03:57:36 PM

Delta18 · Guru

I understood there were 5000 claimants which would give on average $100,000 each. They won't all get that of course as the payout is determined by 'a means test' for want of a better term.

Perhaps when they rebuild those that chose not to insure their property may do so.

aussietraveller · Guru

I really feel some sympathy for people who have lost their homes in Bushfires and even more so for those who lost their family members this court settlement will help but the people who will make a substantial amount from this will be the Lawyers so the break up for the people who survived this disaster will actually receive much less than one would think.

I also believe there needs to be a requirement where people who were not insured should prove hardship as a reason that they were not insured we see regularly where the uninsured receive substantial money from a generous public and the public purse, maybe a requirement like compulsory third party insurance for for a car there could be compulsory home insurance.

Woody n Sue · Guru

I may be a bit hard here but if your home is not insured then you must own it, because if you owe the bank money for it then it must be insured, so if you own it then you can afford to insure it, I have no sympathy for these people from a financial point as they chose to not insure which is there choice, a choice that I as a tax payer I fail to see why I should have to cough up money for when something goes wrong, especially when you look at where some of these houses are built , remember if you live in the sticks sometimes they burn.
I do feel for the loss of family history and possession, however this is also a Loss for those insured as well.
ok ill step down from my soap box now.

hako · Guru

I also wonder whether those homes that were fully insured will still get a share of this payout - I'd imagine they would not but could be wrong.

kiwijims · Guru

Well, to my way of thinking, if the house is fully insured, there should be no payout from this settlement because by now the insurance companies should be on the ball and looking after their clients.

All payments should only go to those who have a genuine hardship such as no insurance in a case where the owner has lost his job and through this has been unable to keep up payments for insurance and pay for temporary accommodation, not everyone has a nice healthy Nest-Egg to fall back on. Just my thoughts anyway.

K.J.