Problems settling “wind versus water” claims after Hurricane Katrina–with policyholders, including members of Congress, challenging denials based on the standard flood exclusion–generated unwanted negative publicity for the insurance business. The fallout has included insurers being skewered in Washington hearings and initiatives launched to repeal the industry’s federal antitrust immunity.

To avoid all these problems, some have wondered whether it might have been better for insurers to just pay all Katrina losses, based on a so-called “moral obligation.”

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free
PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader.


  • All news coverage, best practices, and in-depth analysis.
  • Educational webcasts, resources from industry leaders, and informative newsletters.
  • Other award-winning websites including and

Already have an account?



Join PropertyCasualty360

Don’t miss crucial news and insights you need to make informed decisions for your P&C insurance business. Join now!

  • Unlimited access to - your roadmap to thriving in a disrupted environment
  • Access to other award-winning ALM websites including, and
  • Exclusive discounts on PropertyCasualty360, National Underwriter, Claims and ALM events

Already have an account? Sign In Now
Join PropertyCasualty360

Copyright © 2022 ALM Global, LLC. All Rights Reserved.