In last week's edition, National Underwriter ethics columnistPeter R. Kensicki reported on reader feedback to his latestchallenge: What are the ethical issues raised by lawsuits overclaims for wind-versus-water damage following Hurricane Katrina? Ihave my own thoughts on the subject, briefly outlined in thisentry, but please check out the column for yourself by clickinghere and then weigh in with your take on the situation.

Personally, I think while it's pretty clear that insurance does notcover flood-related damages, it's not quite so clear that suchexclusions applied to all the damage being attributed tostorm-surge in Mississippi. And I certainly wouldn't want to be inan Ole Miss courthouse trying to convince a jury of locals what Imeant to exclude in the policy.

Read the column and feel free to post your observations andopinions. Are insurers in the clear here? Are they simply beingtaken advantage of by a politically-minded state attorney general?Or do they bear any of the responsibility for the confusion–andlitigation–that's ensued? I look forward to hearing from you.