Irene was a camel of a storm, holding massive amounts of water in its broad hurricane hump. It's estimated that parts of New Jersey were hit with 10 inches of rain, while areas in Virginia received 16 inches, North Carolina 13, and Delaware 10 inches. Worst affected appears to be Vermont, which only received an average of seven inches across the state but faces significant infrastructure damages due to the flooding.

Agents and claims professionals, you know what that means: Get your policy-explanation hats on because the wind-versus-water “villain” is about to rise from the dead.

Though it certainly will be less of an issue than with Katrina, there is no doubt that there will be instances of concurrent damage from wind and flooding. What makes Irene different is that houses aren't likely to have been completely swept off their foundations as they were in Katrina, leaving loss causes difficult to ascertain.

But we all know the scenario when there is a clear delineation of wind and water damage. An adjuster tells an insured that his roof damage is covered, but his lower-level flooding isn't. “See, right here in your policy exclusions.” the adjuster will say. “Flooding isn't a covered loss.”

Once again, we'll hear from a vast section of the population that still doesn't realize that flooding is an uncovered loss in most homeowners' policies. The outrage will manifest, and insurers will face the withering scrutiny of having to defend state-approved policy language amidst a firing squad of Facebookers, Tweeters, and consumer organizations who are bound to criticize the industry for “tricky language” and “ impossible to read” policies.

Gird yourselves for the inevitable, prepare for the “reviews,” and hope the credits come quickly.