why is earthquake insurance difficult to sell?

where you live?

Because no-one likes to believe that an earthquake will happen to them and unlike drivers insurance it's not compulsory to have it?

It depends on where you live partially

Because where you need it it's expensive. And spending that money on earthquake-proofing your home rather than buying an insurance policy which won't help you when your insecure house collapses on you makes WAY more sense.

Because like most other insurance, it's mostly a scam.Sure, being without insurance is a gamble. But then again buying insurance is like gambling in a casino. The odds are greatly in favor of "the house" or they wouldn't be as hugely profitable as they are.The odds of an Earthquake damaging your property at anything approaching the amount you pay in premiums is a real long shot. Not to mention that all insurance companies have vast teams of lawyers who do nothing but figure out ways to get out of paying if a claim is ever made. The money would be much better spent on protecting against other things more likely to do greater damage.But most people don't bother to think it through that far, they just think (correctly, but only by coincidence) that it probably won't happen to them.

1. The deductible can be as high as 25% of the value of the property improvements. For many people whose homes have already survived earthquakes, it is not considered cost effective when for example the first $20,000 to $50,000 of damages aren't even covered. Most houses would have to be completely destroyed before the insurance payout is effective. Insurance companies are notorious for using cost estimates that are not based on replacement cost, making the likelihood of actually getting a payout even lower. 2. Earthquake insurers often require an inspection of the property, and require that changes be made that are quite expensive. For example they may require that your home be bolted to its foundation – a practice that wasn’t required by building codes until the early 1960s. Being forced to spend what could cost over ten thousand dollars for repairs just to be able to buy the insurance is likely to make it cost-prohibitive for many homeowners. 3. Despite some recent rate reductions (in California) the price is still high, and could cost as much as a homeowners policy for the same dwelling. Since most homeowner's policies have a $1000 deductible, instead of what is effectively well over a $10,000 deductible, it is probable that most homeowners do not consider the risk-reward ratio to be worthwhile. 4. There is a perception problem. In my opinion, most real estate agents don't know enough about earthquakes to make them recommend earthquake insurance, so instead they advise homeowners that it is a waste of money. To add to that perception problem, I don't know many people who trust insurance agents, so they aren't likely to take advice from an insurance company. The publicity of some insurance companies that still have not settled claims for events like Hurricane Katrina makes the insurance industry look like their "good hands" are only good at collecting payments. 5. Lender's (mortgage companies and banks) do not require earthquake insurance like they do fire insurance. Most people are forced to buy insurance by their lender and in my experience most people only buy the minimum required. To get quotes check here:http://www.earthquakeauthority.com/CEAHome2006.aspx?edate=8&pid=3

Basically, it is just a very shaky business.