hope this is within the scope of the acceptable topics
having lived and seen 1st hand the day-after hurricane andrew hit s.florida and having participated in rebuilding the community, only to be hit with multiple destructive hurricanes in 2005 (most damage by hurricane wilma), am compelled to ask what might be a better way of handling the inevitable losses, endless frustration with dealing with insurance company (it does not matter if you have the coverage, if they decide to delay payment which holds back any plans to pay for repairs and supplies)
have come to the conclusion that perhaps it's best I carry only catastrophic coverage for house as it appears anything less than 10K in damage is not worth to bother the insurance company and just keep 10K in cash stuffed in watertight storage medium
also what prompted me to think about this is the destruction in greensburg, kansas. just this morning NPR was interviewing a fellow who said he had full insurance but I don't think his situation will be any different than the thousands of people who are still waiting for their "full insurance" checks after 10-15 years since the destruction in florida. perhaps insurers are different in the gentle mid-west states.
when you add it all up, a good wallop of a storm can cost you several 10K's in out-of-pocket expenses, lost wages, loss of jobs, loss of infrastructure and even loss of access to banking as I experiences in 2005 when power was gone for several weeks