PA Press: $30,000 in Ball Python's burn up in Hempfield blaze *ugly*

POST GAZETTE (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) 09 October 06 $30,000 in ball pythons burn up in Hempfield blaze; homeowner injured - Snakes were being bred to pay off student loans (Gary Rotstein)
A blaze in Hempfield early yesterday injured the elderly homeowner and cost his son the large collection of ball python snakes he had been breeding to pay off student loans.
Brandon Repovz was keeping more than 100 snakes in the Wooster Street home, where he lives with his father, Robert, and Brandon's girlfriend. Stored on racks of plastic containers in the basement, where the fire evidently started, none of the 3-foot, nonvenomous reptiles survived.
"What I lost there was about $30,000 in snakes. I had about $25,000 in student loans left to pay off, and now there's no easy way to do that," said Mr. Repovz, an Indiana University of Pennsylvania graduate whose full-time job is with a data-tracking firm. He spoke by phone yesterday from the airport in Detroit, which he said he was passing through on his way back from a business conference in Las Vegas.
He said that after the fire began, his father, Robert Repovz, 79, was helped from the home by a neighbor. His father was transported by ambulance to Mercy Hospital, where he was being treated for smoke inhalation, second-degree burns on his hands and first-degree burns to his face.
Adamsburg Volunteer Fire Chief Donald Thoma said neighbors apprised firefighters arriving on the scene after 1:30 a.m. that the homeowners kept "exotic animals" in the basement.
"A few minutes later, they came over to tell us they were mostly, if not all, snakes," Chief Thoma said, with neighbors further reporting that the collection in the home might include hundreds of reptiles, and some might be poisonous.
The basement was so dark that the snakes were hard to see, but it was apparent to firefighters that most or all had died, the chief said. The fire appeared to be electrical in nature and might have been related to special heating tape and pads used for the snakes, he said. The home was severely damaged.
Brandon Repovz said he kept no venomous snakes, and the size of the ball pythons kept the constrictors from being a threat to humans. He has spent the past several years buying them as babies and raising them, to sell via the Internet. At one time, he had 200 of them, but had been gradually reducing the number as he found buyers.
"I'm just crushed," he said, noting neither the house nor the snakes were insured. "I was probably going to be rid of them in about six months. The sole purpose was to pay off loans and be done with them. ... Now I'm coming back from Vegas with no home and a bagful of clothes."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06282/728523-59.stm

I feel for this guy... depending on the snakes to pay his bills like that was silly, but still, I wouldnt wish it on anyone:(

That's so sad.

Hadnt heard about that....not insuring the house was a very big mistake.

Kudos to the Post-Gazette on the way they handled the story.....It did not portray snakes in a bad light and it used the word "venomous" and posionous somewhat interchangably, but in my book it still remains "one of America's Greatest Newspapers"!

I'll be interested to see WPXI's or one of the other local TV news stations' take on the event....My hutch-->it will be sensationalized by them!

Wow what a loss :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mendel's Balls

not insurer the house was a big mistake.

---

There are almost zero insurance underwriters (in the United States) that will write a homeowners policy while knowing that there are snakes of any species within the home. Liability is number one, and fire damage is number two.

-adam

Poor guy! I really wish he had insured his house.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam_Wysocki

There are almost zero insurance underwriters (in the United States) that will write a homeowners policy while knowing that there are snakes of any species within the home. Liability is number one, and fire damage is number two.

-adam

---

Really? Thats not a good idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam_Wysocki

There are almost zero insurance underwriters (in the United States) that will write a homeowners policy while knowing that there are snakes of any species within the home. Liability is number one, and fire damage is number two.

-adam

---

They wont insure a house even with one snake in it? I remember you saying they wouldn't insure the snakes but not even a living structure with a number of non-venomous snakes in it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mendel's Balls

They wont insure a house even with one snake in it?

---

Not that I've been able to find ... at one point I had refusals from over 12 different carriers (not insurance companies, but the actual underwriters) ... but that was years ago ... I've heard the same from people all over the country.

-adam

What if you dont tell them you have a snake?

I wouldnt see it as an issue for claims unless the flexwatt, snake, etc was determined to start the fire. I know that sounds fraudlent but insurance companies arent usually your best friend....and I'm sure it's possible that they might try to stetch the truth and find a some kind of contributing link between the snake and the fire just so they wouldnt have to pay the claim.

Judging from the article, it is believed that flexwatt or such was the cause, and was also my first thought when I read it

Quote:

---

The fire appeared to be electrical in nature and might have been related to special heating tape and pads used for the snakes

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mendel's Balls

They wont insure a house even with one snake in it? I remember you saying they wouldn't insure the snakes but not even a living structure with a number of non-venomous snakes in it?

---

heck a friend of mine can't inshure his house because he own a german sheppard, i can see why they won't insure with snakes as well.

That is such a shame. Working in collections, I saw so many people who had loans and refused to pay them off. Then there's this guy who was trying, working at it.. and all those snakes died; it is a rotten shame.

bleh that sucks...hard.....i can't imagine

Are these fire's super rare? Maybe he had been neglecting his wiring or it wasn't set up right.

Poor guy...glad his father was somewhat OK though. How bad would he had felt if his flexwatt wiring was ruled as the cause and his father HADN'T gotten out alive?

I'm still curious about the whole insurance thing. When I renewed my renter's insurance policy this year, I asked whether or not they had a rider to cover live animals, since almost all standard policies contain and exclusion for that. My agent asked what I had, and I told her I had a small collection of ball pythons. She just politely said that they didn't offer and riders for live animals at all, it's not like she tore up my application or anything....

Yeah that would suck....

I better re-check my wiring :). My insurance company never asked questions about having snakes in the house, if my house burned down they would be able to refuse my insurance?

No way to know how your insurance company would react Bryan but having worked years ago in personal lines insurance I can tell you they will look for any way to get out of paying a claim. If you have snakes with the attendant higher risk factors (from the snakes and from their housing) from what I've heard they won't insure for that risk. Quite likely they could refuse coverage/payment on a claim for non-disclosure of a special risk factor like that if it could be proven your "hobby" caused the claim to occur.

I don't know how it would work however if you were insuring under a business policy rather than through a standard homeowners policy (certainly you'd be looking at far greater premiums just for a start).