Borrower provides "Homeowners Declarations Page" that lists homeowners insurance. On Page 2 of this, it lists "Flood Building Coverage" under a section titled "coverage and endorsements". A flood insurance deductible and premium is listed below this, among other things.

Would this be acceptable proof of flood insurance?

Is this a new loan? For new loans you either need a copy of the policy or an application and proof of payment (cancelled check or receipt from the insurance agency). A dec page is not sufficient.

No, they cancelled the original policy and got flood insurance through a different company. This was provided as proof they received from the new agent.

A dec page is sufficient. I think you might be thinking of a binder, Skittles.

For FDIC banks:

(2) Sufficiency of demonstration. For purposes of confirming a borrower's existing flood insurance coverage under paragraph (b) of this section, an FDIC-supervised institution or its servicer shall accept from the borrower an insurance policy declarations page that includes the existing flood insurance policy number and the identity of, and contact information for, the insurance company or agent.

Perfect, thanks! I saw that reference (we are FDIC), but wasn't sure if it was acceptable to be included with the homeowners. I have always seen them separately.

Thank you both for the quick responses!

I believe only private flood insurance will be combined with hazard. I don't think an NFIP policy will be combined.

OK - so just talking this out, as this is the first time we've come across this - we should probably obtain the entire policy to review to make sure it is equivalent to an NFIP policy. I saw an earlier post from last month discussing the items we should review...

MC: You are correct. I'm seeing more of these. It's basically private flood insurance as a rider with the homeowners insurance. You do need to evaluate it to make sure it meets your bank's requirements.

Does it have to meet the requirements set forth in the Biggert Waters Act even though the regulation is not final?

It should be compared against the proposed regulation (10/13, I believe).