Yet more anti-concurrent cause misunderstanding

When a very good reporter like Randy Diamond of the Palm Beach Post is writing the following:In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, many insurers have pressured state lawmakers to implement what is known as Anti-Concurrent-Causation Clauses. Insurers can use the clause to refuse to pay for wind losses on homes that had also experienced flood damage. The purpose of the clause is to override coverage for an insured claim if, at or about the same time, an uncovered event occurs. Insurance policies don't cover flood damage so insurance companies can use the clause to deny a claim . . . . then you know there is a problem with the way insurance companies are being perceived by the public regarding Katrina claims, and the way anti-concurrent cause language is being explained. Here's a link to Randy