<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"

	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"

	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"

	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"

	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"

	
	>

<channel>

	<title>New answer on: Is It Illegal The Law To Not Have Homeowners Insurance?</title>

	<atom:link href="http://insurancelibrary.com/home-insurance/is-it-illegal-the-law-to-not-have-homeowners-insurance/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

	<link>http://insurancelibrary.com/home-insurance/is-it-illegal-the-law-to-not-have-homeowners-insurance</link>

	<description></description>

	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2024 00:23:46 -0600</lastBuildDate>

	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>

	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>

	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>


	<item>

		<title>By: Joe 'Gravy' Graves</title>

		<link>http://insurancelibrary.com/home-insurance/is-it-illegal-the-law-to-not-have-homeowners-insurance</link>

		<dc:creator>Joe 'Gravy' Graves</dc:creator>

		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Jun 2016 16:54:30 +0000</pubDate>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://insurancelibrary.com/home-insurance/is-it-illegal-the-law-to-not-have-homeowners-insurance</guid>


		<description><![CDATA[(read this is an astonished, chuckling undertone) Stupid is as stupid does. WHY wold you even consider going without? I know that&#039;s a harsh reply. Yet why, why, why, wouldn&#039;t you want to have at least a minimum amount of coverage? Obviously I&#039;m reading into the question. The assumption is, &quot;I&#039;m thinking of cancelling my home insurance to save a few dollars. Is that Illegal?&quot; So go ahead and do it. Yet when your house burns down, I hope you&#039;ll have the character to NOT accept charity or any form of government assistance. It&#039;s your responsibility to manage your household. So do what you want to do... just be ready to live with the choice. :-) - gravy]]></description>

		

	</item>


	<item>

		<title>By: David Pipes</title>

		<link>http://insurancelibrary.com/home-insurance/is-it-illegal-the-law-to-not-have-homeowners-insurance</link>

		<dc:creator>David Pipes</dc:creator>

		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2014 16:15:54 +0000</pubDate>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://insurancelibrary.com/home-insurance/is-it-illegal-the-law-to-not-have-homeowners-insurance</guid>


		<description><![CDATA[Unlike automobile insurance, California does not require a homeowner to have an insurance policy.  The mortgage company will almost always require an insurance policy on which they are named as mortgagee.  That protects their interests.  However, few homeowners can be sued or lose their home in a fire and not feel financial pain.  That is the purpose of the homeowner’s policy, to share that risk with others so that if it should happen to you, you can be made “whole.”]]></description>

		

	</item>


	<item>

		<title>By: Alex Pfeifer</title>

		<link>http://insurancelibrary.com/home-insurance/is-it-illegal-the-law-to-not-have-homeowners-insurance</link>

		<dc:creator>Alex Pfeifer</dc:creator>

		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2014 02:19:49 +0000</pubDate>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://insurancelibrary.com/home-insurance/is-it-illegal-the-law-to-not-have-homeowners-insurance</guid>


		<description><![CDATA[No. It&#039;s not illegal to be without homeowners insurance. However, if you have a mortgage on your house, your lender will require that you carry adequate insurance on your house. Furthermore,  the lender will require that they be listed on the insurance policy. If you do not comply, they will purchase home owners insurance for you and charge you for it. It&#039;s more expensive that way.]]></description>

		

	</item>


</channel>

</rss>

