• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Homeowner's cancelled -- new (old) house

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.



What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? Washington

Purchased old (circa 1900) house end of July with commitment and payment for homeowner's insurance, as per mortgage requirement, from Farmer's Insurance. Two weeks after closing Farmer's advised that owing to prior burglary claim two years prior in different city, different state they would not insure house unless we insured autos with them also.

We switched auto coverage only to have them send us cancellation of homeowner's coverage and refund check, effective November 3. Letter states that paint on south side of house is defective.

Some truth to this -- though temporary repairs have been made to our satisfaction to tide house over until next summer when it can be washed, scrubbed, etc, & totally repainted.

We obtained mortgage owing to this insurance. Can they "commit" and then retract? Can they "bait" with auto insurance only to "change their mind" afterwards?

I filed complaint with insurance commissioner's office, but that will be weeks in the advisory, apparently, and have since learned that homeowner's insurance has become a bear, for a variety of reasons.

Yikes! Advice?


Senior Member
Sorry but if your home doesn't meet inspection you can not be insured. Try a Lloyd of London company. They take bigger risk (aka old homes) where most (about 99%) of companies won't.

Good luck!


My first problem, or question, Tammy, is why would the insurance company not be required to complete their inspection before "committment" to insure was made to lienholder. This laxness (their doing, not ours) could be costly or deadly!

Second problem is how insurance company can bait with auto coverage and still retract.

Is there no "unfair underwriting practice" protection?

Meanwhile, having done a fair bit of recent reading on the topic, it seems that homeowner's insurance policies have become such a quagmire lately it would seem better -- or more honest -- to offer catastrophic coverage policies only and reduce or eliminate the plethora of water, mold, theft, etc. coverages that people have become used to relying on, at least insofar as lienholder protection policies go.



Recognizing this board is little used, I still offer update for future readers should there be any.

First, it was my ignorance not knowing that indeed any insurance company has 60 days within which to withdraw the commitment for insurance by which the mortgage was obtained, and which had been paid in full for the year.

And although the paint presented no insurable risk, even according to the insurance company, it was on a two-and-a-half page list of items under which they can and may withdraw coverage.

However, word now is that they have "reversed their decision" and will extend coverage. I speculate the complaint to the commissioner's office owing to the appearance (or reality?) of "bait & switch" with the auto coverage, was the decisive factor.

The company is Farmer's -- poorly rated nationwide according to Consumer Reports. I would prefer to switch coverage regardless, after this endless headache and stacks of correspondence and rate changes, but I am gratified to have garnered this victory.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential