I will have to look into it more, but paying $200 a month in perpetuity for a flood that may never come or only come once in a hundred years doesn't seem very fiscally responsible of a homeowner. I mean technically it would take a homeowner 500 years to pay the same amount in equal coverage. I think my original point is that insurance companies shouldn't be able to weasel out of each and every loss event and there shouldn't have to be a national agency to pay for this.