If you own a home in a California fire zone, you've probably heard some version of this: "Sorry, nobody will write you. Your only choice is the FAIR Plan."
I hear it constantly. And most of the time, it's wrong.
Recently I worked with a homeowner who owns a place up in Big Bear Lake. He'd been told the same thing everybody up there gets told: the FAIR Plan is the only carrier that will touch a Big Bear property, so just sign up and pay. He was about to lock in at roughly $6,900 a year for fire coverage and call it done.
Here's what that FAIR Plan policy actually covered: fire. That's it.
No liability. So if someone slips and falls on his property and sues, he's paying out of his own pocket. No personal property coverage for what's inside the home. No coverage if a pipe bursts. No coverage for the cost of staying somewhere else while the home is repaired. The FAIR Plan is a last-resort, bare-bones dwelling fire policy. It was never designed to be a complete homeowners policy, and it isn't one.
So before he signed, I did what I always do. I shopped it.
What "shopping it" actually means
The California insurance market has changed a lot in the last couple of years. New carriers have entered specifically to write the high fire-risk homes that the big-name companies walked away from. Some of them use modern wildfire modeling to underwrite properties one at a time instead of redlining entire ZIP codes. If you got declined two or three years ago, that does not mean you'd get declined today. The market is not the same.
For this Big Bear home, I went to one of those specialist carriers first. They're built specifically for high fire-risk California homes and backed by one of the oldest, most established names in global insurance. They wrote the home when, supposedly, "nobody would."
The result
The quote came back at about $6,266 a year. That's less than the FAIR Plan he was about to accept.
For less money, here's what he got instead of fire-only coverage:
- Full dwelling coverage with a built-in cushion above the rebuild estimate, so a costly rebuild after a total loss doesn't leave him short
- Liability coverage, which the FAIR Plan gave him none of
- Personal property coverage for the contents of the home
- Loss-of-use coverage to pay for somewhere to stay if the home is uninhabitable
- Water damage coverage
Same home. Same fire zone. Less money. A real policy instead of a fragment of one.
The honest fine print
I'm not going to pretend every fire-zone policy is perfect, because that's not how this works. A couple of things come with the territory in high-risk areas right now:
A separate, higher wildfire deductible is standard. You'll have one deductible for most claims and a larger one specifically for wildfire. That's normal for fire-zone California today, and you should know the number before you sign anything.
Many of these policies are written on a surplus lines basis. That's the mechanism that lets specialist carriers cover risks the standard market won't. It's routine for fire-zone homes and nothing to be afraid of, but a good broker should explain it to you rather than bury it.
The point isn't that there's a magic policy with no trade-offs. The point is that the right policy, with the trade-offs explained to you honestly, beats blindly accepting a fire-only FAIR Plan because someone told you that's all you can get.
If you've been told the FAIR Plan is your only option
Get a second opinion before you accept that. Specifically:
- Don't assume a past decline still applies. The market has changed, and carriers that didn't exist or weren't writing your area a few years ago may write it now.
- Look at what's actually covered, not just the price. A cheap policy that only covers fire can cost you everything in a claim that isn't a fire.
- Work with someone who shops multiple carriers for you. The FAIR Plan is sometimes the right answer, but it should be the last stop after the others say no, not the first thing you reach for.
If you own a home in a brush zone, the foothills, the mountains, or anywhere a standard carrier has dropped you, that's exactly the kind of risk I work on every day. Sometimes the answer really is the FAIR Plan paired with the right wraparound coverage. Often it's something much better that you were never told existed.
Either way, you deserve to know your real options before you write the check.
Reach out and let's find out what you actually qualify for.
If you own a home in a California fire zone, you've probably heard some version of this: "Sorry, nobody will write you. Your only choice is the FAIR Plan."
I hear it constantly. And most of the time, it's wrong.
Recently I worked with a homeowner who owns a place up in Big Bear Lake. He'd been told the same thing everybody up there gets told: the FAIR Plan is the only carrier that will touch a Big Bear property, so just sign up and pay. He was about to lock in at roughly $6,900 a year for fire coverage and call it done.
Here's what that FAIR Plan policy actually covered: fire. That's it.
No liability. So if someone slips and falls on his property and sues, he's paying out of his own pocket. No personal property coverage for what's inside the home. No coverage if a pipe bursts. No coverage for the cost of staying somewhere else while the home is repaired. The FAIR Plan is a last-resort, bare-bones dwelling fire policy. It was never designed to be a complete homeowners policy, and it isn't one.
So before he signed, I did what I always do. I shopped it.
What "shopping it" actually means
The California insurance market has changed a lot in the last couple of years. New carriers have entered specifically to write the high fire-risk homes that the big-name companies walked away from. Some of them use modern wildfire modeling to underwrite properties one at a time instead of redlining entire ZIP codes. If you got declined two or three years ago, that does not mean you'd get declined today. The market is not the same.
For this Big Bear home, I went to one of those specialist carriers first. They're built specifically for high fire-risk California homes and backed by one of the oldest, most established names in global insurance. They wrote the home when, supposedly, "nobody would."
The result
The quote came back at about $6,266 a year. That's less than the FAIR Plan he was about to accept.
For less money, here's what he got instead of fire-only coverage:
- Full dwelling coverage with a built-in cushion above the rebuild estimate, so a costly rebuild after a total loss doesn't leave him short
- Liability coverage, which the FAIR Plan gave him none of
- Personal property coverage for the contents of the home
- Loss-of-use coverage to pay for somewhere to stay if the home is uninhabitable
- Water damage coverage
Same home. Same fire zone. Less money. A real policy instead of a fragment of one.
The honest fine print
I'm not going to pretend every fire-zone policy is perfect, because that's not how this works. A couple of things come with the territory in high-risk areas right now:
A separate, higher wildfire deductible is standard. You'll have one deductible for most claims and a larger one specifically for wildfire. That's normal for fire-zone California today, and you should know the number before you sign anything.
Many of these policies are written on a surplus lines basis. That's the mechanism that lets specialist carriers cover risks the standard market won't. It's routine for fire-zone homes and nothing to be afraid of, but a good broker should explain it to you rather than bury it.
The point isn't that there's a magic policy with no trade-offs. The point is that the right policy, with the trade-offs explained to you honestly, beats blindly accepting a fire-only FAIR Plan because someone told you that's all you can get.
If you've been told the FAIR Plan is your only option
Get a second opinion before you accept that. Specifically:
- Don't assume a past decline still applies. The market has changed, and carriers that didn't exist or weren't writing your area a few years ago may write it now.
- Look at what's actually covered, not just the price. A cheap policy that only covers fire can cost you everything in a claim that isn't a fire.
- Work with someone who shops multiple carriers for you. The FAIR Plan is sometimes the right answer, but it should be the last stop after the others say no, not the first thing you reach for.
If you own a home in a brush zone, the foothills, the mountains, or anywhere a standard carrier has dropped you, that's exactly the kind of risk I work on every day. Sometimes the answer really is the FAIR Plan paired with the right wraparound coverage. Often it's something much better that you were never told existed.
Either way, you deserve to know your real options before you write the check.
Reach out and let's find out what you actually qualify for.
If you own a home in a California fire zone, you've probably heard some version of this: "Sorry, nobody will write you. Your only choice is the FAIR Plan."
I hear it constantly. And most of the time, it's wrong.
Recently I worked with a homeowner who owns a place up in Big Bear Lake. He'd been told the same thing everybody up there gets told: the FAIR Plan is the only carrier that will touch a Big Bear property, so just sign up and pay. He was about to lock in at roughly $6,900 a year for fire coverage and call it done.
Here's what that FAIR Plan policy actually covered: fire. That's it.
No liability. So if someone slips and falls on his property and sues, he's paying out of his own pocket. No personal property coverage for what's inside the home. No coverage if a pipe bursts. No coverage for the cost of staying somewhere else while the home is repaired. The FAIR Plan is a last-resort, bare-bones dwelling fire policy. It was never designed to be a complete homeowners policy, and it isn't one.
So before he signed, I did what I always do. I shopped it.
What "shopping it" actually means
The California insurance market has changed a lot in the last couple of years. New carriers have entered specifically to write the high fire-risk homes that the big-name companies walked away from. Some of them use modern wildfire modeling to underwrite properties one at a time instead of redlining entire ZIP codes. If you got declined two or three years ago, that does not mean you'd get declined today. The market is not the same.
For this Big Bear home, I went to one of those specialist carriers first. They're built specifically for high fire-risk California homes and backed by one of the oldest, most established names in global insurance. They wrote the home when, supposedly, "nobody would."
The result
The quote came back at about $6,266 a year. That's less than the FAIR Plan he was about to accept.
For less money, here's what he got instead of fire-only coverage:
- Full dwelling coverage with a built-in cushion above the rebuild estimate, so a costly rebuild after a total loss doesn't leave him short
- Liability coverage, which the FAIR Plan gave him none of
- Personal property coverage for the contents of the home
- Loss-of-use coverage to pay for somewhere to stay if the home is uninhabitable
- Water damage coverage
Same home. Same fire zone. Less money. A real policy instead of a fragment of one.
The honest fine print
I'm not going to pretend every fire-zone policy is perfect, because that's not how this works. A couple of things come with the territory in high-risk areas right now:
A separate, higher wildfire deductible is standard. You'll have one deductible for most claims and a larger one specifically for wildfire. That's normal for fire-zone California today, and you should know the number before you sign anything.
Many of these policies are written on a surplus lines basis. That's the mechanism that lets specialist carriers cover risks the standard market won't. It's routine for fire-zone homes and nothing to be afraid of, but a good broker should explain it to you rather than bury it.
The point isn't that there's a magic policy with no trade-offs. The point is that the right policy, with the trade-offs explained to you honestly, beats blindly accepting a fire-only FAIR Plan because someone told you that's all you can get.
If you've been told the FAIR Plan is your only option
Get a second opinion before you accept that. Specifically:
- Don't assume a past decline still applies. The market has changed, and carriers that didn't exist or weren't writing your area a few years ago may write it now.
- Look at what's actually covered, not just the price. A cheap policy that only covers fire can cost you everything in a claim that isn't a fire.
- Work with someone who shops multiple carriers for you. The FAIR Plan is sometimes the right answer, but it should be the last stop after the others say no, not the first thing you reach for.
If you own a home in a brush zone, the foothills, the mountains, or anywhere a standard carrier has dropped you, that's exactly the kind of risk I work on every day. Sometimes the answer really is the FAIR Plan paired with the right wraparound coverage. Often it's something much better that you were never told existed.
Either way, you deserve to know your real options before you write the check.
Reach out and let's find out what you actually qualify for.
Michael Canepa is the founder and principal broker of Redline Insurance Agency in North Hollywood, California. Redline writes home, auto, and commercial coverage across California, with a focus on the risks other agents call impossible. Bilingual English/Spanish.
Call or text (818) 823-5778 · michael@redlineinsurance.com · redlineinsurance.com · CA License #0H75788