Great explanation, thank you. Now that you say it, it reminds me of how a law school lecturer explained that often litigation was exactly as you describe: there

Great explanation, thank you. Now that you say it, it reminds me of how a law school lecturer explained that often litigation was exactly as you describe: there wasn't a breakdown of relations, but it was due to a bankruptcy/death, and insurance companies then litigated it to the hilt (which, rationally, they should do, so they know exactly what the law is, and can adjust premiums appropriately to reflect the risk they will bear. But in practice, the fighting and blaming is pretty unpleasant) The meat of the case is the story of the previous agreement of the parties, so you could get an excessively jaded view of business if you assumed that people kept on turning on each other afterwards. In law school, every agreement ends in disaster.