Letters to the Editor: Is it right for insurance companies to charge more for others’ losses?

To the editor: Let’s talk about homeowners’ insurance (“Insurers seek to surcharge California homeowners for L.A. County fire costs,” May 13). Most of us homeowners decide to essentially bet that we might have a fire, theft or other event at our home. So we insure our home.

When an event happens, the insurance company, in essence, loses the bet. If no events happen, the insurance companies win and enjoy many years of premium payments. In normal betting, when you lose, you don’t ask the other winning bettors to chip in to pay for your loss. So why is it legal for insurance companies to ask homeowners that have paid for years without a claim to pay for others’ losses? Seems like insurance companies have a win-win business, at least for their stockholders.

Cheryl Shrock, Tustin

..

To the editor: Here is one homeowner who hopes that a rate increase is approved for all insured homeowners in California. The idea of insurance is to have an adequate pool of money to pay claims. With the likelihood of more fires in populated areas, all will have to pay their fair share so that the few who suffer a loss are covered. Another benefit of higher premiums will be to force people to take climate change seriously.

Robert Paris, Grenada Hills

..

To the editor: Nobody will ever convince me why I should pay for the lack of responsibility by our city officials, who allow homes to be built in fire areas, or for those homeowners lacking common sense in choosing to live in a dangerous hillside area. It doesn’t take a genius to know that it is very, very possible for a fire to take place in the hillsides of Los Angeles. There’s plenty of history.

Dave Simon, North Hollywood