HMS Surprise under sail in the San Diego channel.  Twas a weekend of sailing for HMS Surprise.  HMS Surprise was featured in Masters and Commanders, staring Russell Crow.  This past weekend we crossed her as she was sailing back into the bay.  It's always a treat to watch these ships under sail and we are privileged in San Diego to have several of them in sailing condition and actually sailing.

 

Here are a few things bargain-hungry consumers need to know before they hit stores before dawn the day after Thanksgiving.

Here's a Black Friday reality check: Of the hordes of pre-dawn shoppers who line up for hours outside stores on the day after Thanksgiving, most will not bag the best bargains that appear in merchants' circulars.

Look at the fine print that appears next to an advertised "doorbuster deal" at the bottom of the page in this year's circulars.

It will either say "While supplies last," "Minimum 2 per store," "No rainchecks" or "All items are available in limited quantities."

A quick scan through a few of this year's Black Friday circulars show quantities as low as a "minimum of 5 per store" on some models of large plasma and HDTVs and popular brands of home appliances such as a washer-dryer pair.

Should Black Friday deal hunters feel cheated? Yes they should, say some retail experts.

"It's a sleazy practice," said Craig Johnson, retailing expert and president of retail consulting group Customer Growth Partners.

"I am old school," said Johnson. "If a retailer is advertising a juicy deal and they are not prepared to have in sufficient quantity, don't advertise it. Or give consumers a raincheck."

Johnson said it's not enough for retailers to mention that they'll have such limited quantities of a product on one of the most-hyped shopping days of the year.

"Retailers aren't winning any customers. They are just pissing off people," he said. "It's poor retailing practice."

Unfortunately for consumers, more examples abound.

CNNMoney.com spoke to industry experts to uncover a few dirty secrets of Black Friday deals.

Limited quantities: Advertising a Black Friday deal as "limited quantities" is bogus, said Johnson.

"The only time it makes sense to have only two or three [items] in stock is if the deal is on a $2 million gift product that appears in the Neiman Marcus holiday catalog," he said.

Edgar Dworsky, a consumer advocate and editor of Consumer World, agreed with Johnson.

"C'mon guys. Give me a break," said Dworsky. "How can you be the size of a retailer like Sears and only get a minimum of five per store, yet devote big space in your circular to advertise that deal?

Sears (SHLD, Fortune 500) has not officially revealed its Black Friday sales. However, the company confirmed to CNNMoney.com that two of its post-Thanksgiving deals include a Samsung 40-inch 1080p LCD HDTV for $599.99, "Only while quantities last, minimum three per store, no rainchecks."

The other is a Kenmore 3.5-cubic-foot high-efficiency washer and 5.8-cubic foot dryer pair for $579.98, "Limit four per store, no rainchecks."

"Sure, you probably have more, but how do you put out a circular to millions of households and only have three?," Dworsky asked.

When asked for a comment, Sears spokesman Tom Aiello said he was "not comfortable" addressing the issue of limited quantities for some Black Friday deals.

Such short supply on deals are not only annoying but can also be dangerous to Black Friday shoppers.

"We saw the stampede at a Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500) store in New York last year on Black Friday that led to an employee's death," said Burt Flickinger, managing director of consulting firm Strategic Resource Group. "The stampede happened because so many of the deals were advertised as limited supply."

One retailer, while not explaining why its advertised deals are in such limited supplies, said it is taking measures to better handle the Black Friday rush.

"From going down the line and handing out doorbuster tickets that guarantee a purchase in advance of the store opening, to printing the minimum quantities in the circular, we go to great lengths to ensure that the Black Friday consumer knows exactly how many items will be at the store and whether or not they will be able to purchase one prior to entering the store," Best Buy (BBY, Fortune 500) wrote in an e-mail.

What do you mean this HDTV is a "derivative?" Some of the holiday electronics with those low sale prices are derivatives, models that have a few less features than a standard model in that product line, said Dworsky.

The difference can be subtle. "The image contrast ratio might be 20,000 in a derivative model versus 30,000 in a standard model," he said. "Most consumers probably won't even notice the difference."

A report earlier this month in Consumer Reports called attention to HDTV models from Samsung and Sony advertised in Black Friday deals that appear to be "derivatives." The report said these one-off TVs "with unfamiliar model numbers" are usually cheaper than the standard model in their class.

Dworsky cautions that retailers usually don't advertise these models as derivatives. "There's no way the average consumer will know that the TV model they are buying is not the standard one unless they are savvy enough to compare their model numbers," he said.

Which Black Friday deals are online? "Many retailers will say that their Black Friday deals are available online," said Dworsky. "But they're not nice enough to tell you which ones."

"How about telling me which exact ones so I can shop online from home and I'm not in my pajamas at 5 a.m. in front of your store," he said.

Online deals that never get shipped: Case in point: Sears. Last year, one of Sears' hottest Black Friday doorbuster deal was on a Kenmore washer-dryer pair for $600.

Even though the retailer advertised that deal to be in "limited quantities," the company decided to honor every customer order made on that deal last Black Friday.

Big mistake. The manufacturer could not ramp up production fast enough. Some customers waited months before their order was shipped. Others were sold a substitute model, that was "comparable or even better" for the same deal price, said Sears' Aiello.

Lesson learned. "We will not be doing that again this year," he said.

Be careful if you're shopping online on Black Friday, said Dworsky.

"Since retailers don't have a live inventory online you run the risk of getting an e-mail weeks later that your order had been delayed or worse, canceled, because the product is out of stock," he said.

About those rainchecks: Finally, if a retailer does offer you a raincheck on a deal, it could still turn out to be an empty promise, Flickinger warned.

"A raincheck doesn't guarantee that you will eventually get that elusive Black Friday deal," he said. "Consumers can go weeks waiting and hoping, and the retailer may never get more of the product shipped to its stores." 

http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/108212/dirty-secrets-of-black-friday-doorbusters

According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the average annual utility bill in the United States is currently $1,767, and energy costs are expected to continue to rise over the next few years. But the financial burden of high monthly utility bills is only one part of the challenge of energy production in America. Energy independence is rapidly becoming a priority since it offers great opportunities in the areas of job creation, manufacturing and environmental preservation.

The DOE has determined that energy conservation is the cheapest, cleanest and fastest way to reduce the environmental impact of energy production and improve national energy security.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) was signed into law in February of 2009 and is an economic stimulus package meant to create jobs and jump-start the American economy. As well as providing funding across a number of industries -- including health care, agriculture, and education -- the ARRA has allocated a significant amount of money for energy conservation and renewable energy production. To help get the nation working towards serious conservation, the bill allocates more than $40 billion to energy-related issues. Some of this funding will specifically address the new and existing housing industry by providing tax credits, rebates, and incentives to home buyers, homeowners and builders.

Builders, remodelers, home owners and home buyers can all take advantage of sizable financial rewards by investing in energy efficiency, but only if they understand how the incentives work and how to access them.

Understanding the expanded tax credits, how to utilize rebates and utilize loan programs, and how to keep abreast of changes at the state and local level -- which may add new incentives as the ARRA is implemented in the upcoming months -- will all help greatly with making informed purchasing decisions.

There are three basic categories of opportunity related to energy-conservation improvements and renewable energy systems in new and existing homes.

Tax credits: A tax credit is a sum of money subtracted directly from the tax liability at the end of the year. For consumers, tax credits can be very attractive because the amount of the credit directly reduces the taxes owed to the Federal or state government.

Credits are often confused with tax deductions but there is a significant difference.

A deduction is a sum of money subtracted from the total taxable income. For instance if someone has an annual income of $60 thousand, and qualifies for a $2,000 tax deduction, their taxable income would be reduced to $58 thousand.

A credit on the other hand, is subtracted directly from the tax burden. So for someone earns $60 thousand and is at 10 percent tax rate, their tax burden would be $6,000. A $2,000 tax credit would reduce that amount to $4,000. Tax credits reduce the amount owed on taxes dollar-for-dollar and not just by a percentage.

In 2005 and 2008, tax credits for some energy-efficient improvements were allowed with a limit of $500. The 2009 ARRA has increased the amount to $1,500 and has extended that deadline through 2010 for existing homes and 2016 for new homes. These credits include installing approved Energy Star-rated windows, skylights, and doors, insulation, heating and cooling equipment and certain "cool" roofing materials.

Another major change for home owners is the tax credits available for onsite renewable and low-impact energy systems, such as solar panels, small wind turbines, and geothermal heat pumps. These systems now have tax credits of 30 percent with no limit on the amount of credit available. This means that builders have an excellent incentive to encourage potential buyers to invest in onsite power generation and existing home owners can save almost a third of the costs on installing these systems. For remodelers, a 30 percent tax credit on equipment can enable home owners to expand projects without expanding their budget.

Home builders are also eligible for a $2,000 tax credit simply by building home that achieve 50 percent energy savings for heating and cooling over the 2004 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). At least 20 percent of these energy savings must come from improvements to the building envelope – the external shell of the building that seals out the weather and seals in a comfortable, efficient and healthy living space. The Energy Star web site provides the required forms for this tax credit as well as more information about funds available to builders of manufactured homes.

Rebates: Rebates are funds paid directly to builders and home owners when purchasing equipment or undertaking building improvements.

Unlike tax credits, rebates are generally paid "in cash" after purchase. Rebates are an effective way to stretch home remodeling and new construction dollars because simply by choosing energy efficient products, home owners, builders, and remodelers can save money. Whether it is purchasing a high efficiency laundry set that uses less energy and water, or a programmable thermostat, rebate programs can help offset the costs of normal purchases. There are two primary sources of rebates – manufacturers and utility companies.

Many of Energy Star's product partners provide significant rebates to encourage customers to buy energy efficient products. Rebates are intended to encourage energy conservation, but also to help accelerate adoption of new products in the market. To find out about manufacturer and some utility rebates, visit the The Energy Star web site.

Utility companies often provide rebates on installation of energy saving improvements like insulation, weatherization, and appliances. For example, Austin Energy offers a program designed to help home owners purchase improvements like heat pumps, air conditioners, home weatherization, duct sealing, and insulation.

To find out about utility and other rebate programs in your area, including state, local, utility and federal incentives that promote energy efficiency and renewable energy, visit the Database for State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (DSIRE) web site.

Loans: In this economy, many people simply can't afford to front the cash for energy improvements or renewable energy systems. Loan programs with favorable interest rates and terms, including home equity loans and increases in mortgage amounts, provide an option for those interested in investing in improvements, but lacking the upfront funding. It may not make sense, the idea of taking out a loan in such trying times, to perform energy conservation measures, but combined with the tax credit situation, and rebates, the scenario is much more attractive.

Take this example: you want to install a geo-thermal or ground-source heat pump system in your new home to have ultra-low heating and cooling bills. The cost of $30,000 for the system is scary. But, if you roll that $30,000 into your 5-percent, 30-year fixed mortgage, it costs you an extra $160 per month and saves you a little less than that in monthly utility bills. But, because of the significant tax credits available today, you'll get an extra $9,000 tax credit come next April -- in cash. Plus, as energy costs rise, that $160 a month cost could be a whole lot more attractive than what your utility bills would have been had you not installed the system.

For builders and remodelers, making cases like this for the homeowner is critical. Often consumers don't understand what incentives are available. By helping them understand and claim these benefits, builders and remodelers can provide practical energy-saving solutions. These solutions helps upsell customers, helps the home owner save money and helps the country by putting the ARRA funds to work.

The bottom line is that the combination of tax credits, rebates and favorable loan programs provides a significant incentive for people wishing to improve the energy performance of their homes, or invest in renewable energy systems. These investments have the potential to increase green jobs -- the people manufacturing, installing, and maintaining these systems -- and to radically improve our environment, energy and economic security.

That's why the government is so interested in using some of this ARRA money for energy conservation, and why you should be, too.

http://www.hgtvpro.com/hpro/bp_green_building/article/0,3140,HPRO_29336_5941606,00.html

"The task force advised on Monday that most women should not start routine screening until they are 50, as opposed to the current standard of 40. The reason, according to the task force, is that studies show that “the additional benefit gained by starting screening at age 40 years rather than at age 50 years is small"

The additional benefit is small.....unless you are a women in her 40s developing cancer... Then what? How many women would have developed cancer and died from it had they not had screening... Statistical analysis, the cold hard facts, unless you are in the small percentage affected, then the benefit becomes substantial

Regulation is situation-specific; values guide people on what to do in any situation

Everywhere I travel, I hear the same refrains: "We need more regulation," or on the flip side, "If we hadn't deregulated, we wouldn't be in this financial mess."

It looks like the White House is of this mind-set. Citing Wall Street for helping to create a "culture of irresponsibility," President Obama wants to impose more rules on the financial industry by, among other things, creating a Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

More regulation, and in particular a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, could be a very good thing, but I would suggest we don't rush to regulation without careful consideration of two key questions:

What is the source of the regulation? Is regulation being imposed on people from the outside or is it coming from within?

Is the mechanism another list of "dos and don'ts" or is it something deeper, something that inspires consistent and right behavior?

We all know that Thomas Jefferson once said, "That government is best which governs the least," and this quote is often used to support the argument for less regulation. But what many don't know is that Jefferson went on to say: "... because its people discipline themselves."

In this way, Jefferson isn't making an argument against regulation but rather putting forth an argument for the most effective source of regulation: self-regulation.

Theodore Roosevelt echoed Jefferson's sentiments when he said: "Men can't escape from being governed. They either must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others. If from lawlessness or fickleness, from folly or self-indulgence, they refuse to govern themselves, then most assuredly in the end they will have to be governed by the outside."

So as we, in 2009, work to overcome our "culture of irresponsibility," we need to embrace self-regulation and discipline and understand and embrace the most effective mechanism for it, which is values.

Don't get me wrong; I'm all for regulation. People need limits and boundaries. Thoughtful regulation can make financial transactions more transparent so consumers better understand the risks they're taking. But the more important questions we need to ask are:

Will regulation fix our culture of irresponsibility?

Can external rules prevent another financial Katrina?

Or does the culture itself — how we behave — need to change?

I would argue that our culture needs to change. And it can change only if it is driven by something more compelling than rules.

While I understand why we need rules, I also know that we need to understand what rules can do and what they can't. For example, I live in Los Angeles, and I am grateful that rules, based on solid science, have been implemented to govern the construction of buildings to make them earthquake-resistant. We need rules that prohibit sales of new drugs before they are approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Regulations can also promote transparency, as do laws that require publicly held companies to disclose their earnings, governance structure and executive pay.

But rules are less successful when they seek to govern human conduct and behavior. Rules ultimately fail because you cannot write a rule to control every possible behavior or cover every possible circumstance. It is very difficult to regulate deception, for instance. A rules-based law will do little to deter someone who wishes to be deceptive in their mortgage application. By setting floors for behavior, rules unintentionally also set ceilings.

This is a problem inside business as well as government. Let's agree that companies want to do the right thing. But they need and want to do more. They want to engage their people. They want to innovate. They want to encourage creativity and prudent risk-taking. To accomplish those goals, employees must be inspired. Rules and regulations do not inspire. To the contrary, too many rules and regulations limit behavior. They diminish autonomy and risk-taking. They suggest that people can't be trusted. Rules can be dangerous because they dictate what you can and cannot do and not what you should or should not do.

Rules are fundamentally coercive. If you misbehave, you'll be in trouble. Traditionally, business leaders have used a mix of motivation and coercion — carrots and sticks, if you will — to induce people to perform and to get them to abide by rules. Today, we are discovering the limits of carrots and sticks. We're learning that we can't write enough rules to get the behaviors we want. Nor can we deliver enough motivation.

All Rules Have Loopholes
If my carrot is a paycheck, I will leave the company for a bigger salary. If I chose to buy from a company based on price, my loyalty ends at the bottom line. Motivation turns out to be an expensive way to compel behavior, particularly in a recession when there are fewer carrots to go around.

Let's take the example of an Alaskan postal clerk who chose to express his individuality by wearing ties to work decorated with The Three Stooges and cartoon characters. His bosses were not amused and told the clerk to follow the rules regarding permissible neckwear. Now he wears suspenders that feature the caricature Taz, the Tasmanian Devil. Is this the outcome the bosses wanted? Of course not. But in focusing on the specific language of the dress code rather than the intent behind it, management has boxed itself into a situation where it really can't complain about the postal clerk's cartoon-character suspenders. Technically, the postal clerk is following the rules.

Or how about the Wisconsin law that uses taxpayer money to support a child-care-assistance program? The program pays for in-home child care, so the parents can work. But four sisters in Racine figured out they could stay home, watch each other's kids and be paid for it. They netted over $500,000 in taxpayer funds in less than three years. Legal? Yes. What the Wisconsin lawmakers had in mind? Of course not.

Rules create loopholes — values do not. If those in leadership roles want to shape behavior, they must pay more attention to instilling values. They are the underpinning of belief, and that's what inspires people and gives them a sense of mission and purpose. Only beliefs and the values that underpin them can be shared. Values perform a kind of double duty by acting as both a source and a mechanism for regulation.

If we go bowling, we can put a guard rail on the lane so that you don't throw gutter balls. But there is no mechanism to help you bowl a strike — either in life or in business. How do you throw strikes? By inviting people to buy into shared beliefs and values so that they are inspired — not coerced or motivated — to act responsibly. That's the way to avoid engendering a culture of irresponsibility.

Regulation can only go so far. Let's not try to regulate our way out of a financial meltdown. We must find the values and behaviors that will sustain innovation and ethical action. How you do things can never be based solely on rules.

Inspiration is the most sustainable and effective method of engendering principled performance. In response to those who say values are too "soft" to be reliable sources of inspiration, we need to make them "hard" by turning values into practices and behaviors.

Let's walk away from the mind-set that dictates "too big to fail" as a reason to act. Let's find a way to demonstrate that size doesn't matter, values do. Let's create a culture of responsibility by inspiring responsible behavior.

If we don't, we may find ourselves in trouble again.

http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/dov-seidman/how-why-how-we-do-anything-means-everything/why-values-trump-rules-and-regulation?partner=leadership_newsletter

More than 15 million taxpayers could unexpectedly owe taxes when they file their federal returns next spring because the government was too generous with their new Making Work Pay tax credit.

Taxpayers are at risk if they have more than one job, are married and both spouses work, or receive Social Security benefits while also earning taxable wages, according to a report Monday by the Treasury Department's inspector general for tax administration.

The tax credit, which is supposed to pay individuals up to $400 and couples up to $800, was President Barack Obama's signature tax break in the massive stimulus package enacted in February.

Most workers started receiving the credit through small increases in their paychecks in April. The tax credit was made available through new withholding tables issued by the Internal Revenue Service.

The withholding tables, however do not take into account taxpayers with multiple jobs or married couples in which both people work. They also don't take into account Social Security recipients with jobs that provided taxable income.

The Social Security Administration sent out $250 payments to more than 50 million retirees in the spring as part of the economic stimulus package. The payments were meant to provide a boost for people who didn't' qualify for the tax credit.

However, they went to many retirees who also received the credit. Those retirees will have the $250 payment deducted from their tax credit — but not until they file their tax returns next year, long after the money may have been spent.

"While implementing a credit through reduced withholding is an effective way to provide economic stimulus evenly throughout the year, it is difficult to account for everyone's circumstances," said J. Russell George, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration. "More than 10 percent of all taxpayers who file individual tax returns for 2009 could owe additional taxes."

The tax credit is also available for 2010. Russell said the problems will continue in 2010 if they are not resolved.

For many, the new tax tables will simply mean smaller-than-expected tax refunds next year. The average tax refund this year was about $3,000.

The IRS, in a response to the audit, advised taxpayers to check their withholding throughout the year to make sure they don't get hit with an unexpected tax bill.

"The withholding system must approximate the tax liability of tens of millions of Americans, and therefore, cannot be tailored precisely to fit every individual situation," Richard Byrd Jr., commissioner of the IRS' wage and investments division, wrote in the agency's response to the report.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091116/ap_on_bi_ge/us_tax_credit_pickle

Belief that numbers are connected to physical things has a long history

If Friday the 13th is unlucky, then 2009 has been an unusually unlucky year. But your luck is about to change. Today is the last of three Friday the 13ths you'll have to endure this year.

The other two were in February and March. Such a rare triple-threat occurs only once every 11 years.

The origin of the link between bad luck and Friday the 13th is murky. The whole thing might date to Biblical times (the 13th guest at the Last Supper betrayed Jesus). By the Middle Ages, both Friday and the number 13 were considered bearers of bad fortune. In modern times, the superstition permeates society.

Here are five of our favorite Friday-the-13th facts:

1. Fear of Friday the 13th — one of the most popular myths in science — is called paraskavedekatriaphobia as well as friggatriskaidekaphobia. Triskaidekaphobia is fear of the number 13.

2. Many hospitals have no room 13, while some tall buildings skip the 13th floor and some airline terminals omit Gate 13.

3. President Franklin D. Roosevelt would not travel on the 13th day of any month and would never host 13 guests at a meal. Napoleon and President Herbert Hoover were also triskaidekaphobic, with an abnormal fear of the number 13.

4. Mark Twain once was the 13th guest at a dinner party. A friend warned him not to go. "It was bad luck," Twain later told the friend. "They only had food for 12." Superstitious diners in Paris can hire a quatorzieme, or professional 14th guest.

5. The number 13 suffers from its position after 12, according to numerologists who consider the latter to be a complete number — 12 months in a year, 12 signs of the zodiac, 12 gods of Olympus, 12 labors of Hercules, 12 tribes of Israel, 12 apostles of Jesus, 12 days of Christmas and 12 eggs in a dozen.

Pythagorean legacy
Meanwhile the belief that numbers are connected to life and physical things — called numerology — has a long history.

"You can trace it all the way from the followers of Pythagoras, whose maxim to describe the universe was 'all is number,'" says Mario Livio, an astrophysicist and author of "The Equation That Couldn't Be Solved" (Simon & Schuster, 2005). Thinkers who studied under the famous Greek mathematician combined numbers in different ways to explain everything around them, Livio said.

In modern times, numerology has become a type of para-science, much like the meaningless predictions of astrology, scientists say.

"People are subconsciously drawn towards specific numbers, because they know that they need the experiences, attributes or lessons associated with them, that are contained within their potential," says professional numerologist Sonia Ducie. "Numerology can 'make sense' of an individual's life (health, career, relationships, situations and issues) by recognizing which number cycle they are in, and by giving them clarity."

However, mathematicians dismiss numerology, saying it lacks any scientific merit.

"I don't endorse this at all," Livio said, when asked to comment on the popularity of commercial numerology. Seemingly coincidental connections between numbers will always appear if you look hard enough, he said.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33913248/ns/technology_and_science-science/

 

Some words are red flags to insurers and using them could mean that your claim might be delayed or even denied.

1. "I Think ..."

Never begin a statement regarding a claim with these words. If you aren't sure, don't guess. What you say could cause your claim to be delayed or denied, says attorney Vedica Puri. And if you're wrong -- say, you report driving at 30 miles per hour before an accident but police later prove you were going 50 -- it could hurt your credibility.

Particularly beware of speculating on blame or causation. For example, if you suggest that a water leak is due to a construction defect, you could give the insurer an out if that's a policy exclusion.

Stick to the facts. Should the insurance rep ask you a question you can't answer, simply say, "I don't know." If the person is taking a written or recorded statement, ask for a transcript to review for misstatements.

2. "I Got Whiplash"

Fraud costs auto insurers up to $6.8 billion a year, reports the Insurance Research Council. And suing for damages caused by whiplash is a fraudster favorite ("Oh, my neck!"). Merely mentioning the term is likely to get your claim flagged for further investigation, says Amy Danise of Insure.com.

Whiplash is a specific diagnosis. If a doctor says that you have it, then you should report it as such. Other wise, if you feel neck pain, just refer to it that way.

3. "It's an Experimental Treatment"

Truly experimental or investigational medical procedures are typically not eligible for health insurance coverage. So if a doctor tells you he wants to experiment with a treatment, don't represent it using those words. "In medical terms it may not actually be experimental or investigational," explains Danise. "If it's proven effective, your doctor deems it medically necessary, and it's not an exclusion, it should be covered." Verify with your doctor that it meets the above litmus tests before going to the insurer.

4. "My Basement Flooded"

With homeowners insurance, "flood" is a red flag. "The word refers to an act of weather or an overflow from a nearby body of water," says Danise. "And a standard homeowners policy doesn't cover it. You'd need flood insurance."

So don't use the f-word if your basement is knee-deep in water because of a burst pipe. Damages from such an incident should be covered by a homeowners policy. But calling it a "flood" could muddy the waters, so to speak.

5. "Just Send Me a Check"

When filing a home or auto claim, don't emphasize that you're just looking for the cash.

"If you were to say, 'I don't care about the roof leak, I just need the money,' that admission could slow things to a halt," says Puri. Technically, you're supposed to use the payout to make the repair for which you filed. While it's true that most insurance companies aren't going to check up on you, you'll certainly raise the fraud unit's suspicions if you imply that you won't. And then you might lose out on the money altogether.

http://finance.yahoo.com/insurance/article/108074/5-things-never-to-say-to-your-insurers?mod=insurance