Sorry already posted this in the general enquiries forum but been advised to post here.

My house insurance was up for renewal.I went to renew it and was greeted with ''we no longer include flood cover as this has cost us too much in the past 2 years''.As it was my 2 properties were insured for 4.5 million,but restricted to 100,000 for flood damage and 100,000 for an earthquake.I said ''ok fair enough i'll take my business elsewhere''to which the reply was ''every company is the same now no ones insuring for flooding''.First is this true and second is this legal?

This got me thinking.Ok i own both properties outright, but what if i didn't, and i'd borrowed say 2.5 million from the bank, and my house was demolished by an earthquake. I would get 100,000, but i'd still owe the bank 2.4million.They could sell the land it once stood on thats worth about 250,000,but i'd still owe the bank 2,150,000.Now hypothetically, me and my family's got no where to live,and with no other assets.How would the bank recover it's 2.15 million?

I've asked many people these questions but can't seem to get an answer.I'd be grateful for any thoughts.

Yes to both questions - quite true and legal

To be honest Flood cover is a non starter. Any insurance companies now offer All Risks with flood cover of 1000 bht, yes 1000 bht. This is so they can still offer an All Risks policy but not actually cover any REAL RISK.

NZI/IAG still offer earthquake coverage and wind typhoon damage but not floods (except that massive 1000bht!). They will also do house contents, including art work, furniture etc., They will also offer all risk (out of the home) for personal effects if you supply copies of receipts/photos etc.,

However the real crunch comes is when you have to make a claim. Not done that yet so couldn't comment. NZI seemed to have their act together until they passed control to safety insurance public company ltd. Not as efficient I'm afraid.

Premiums with NZI have risen approx 18% cf last year.

Just google NZI thailand. The SIPCL web site is pants though.

To the OP - chances are you would not be offered a loan but if so same as all the loans offered to the Thais if they have not taken guarantees. You would still owe the bank and presumably they would deal with you as any other debtor....