> The main problem I heard with briandear's example is that people apparently didn't understand the coverage they had purchased. While that's true, a part of t

> The main problem I heard with briandear's example is that people apparently didn't understand the coverage they had purchased. While that's true, a part of the reason is the complexity of policies, and exclusions for situations which people consider "common sense" to be covered. Situations which are medium risk, but part of people's everyday lives. For example, my travel insurance does not cover accidents which are "a result of drug or alcohol influence". My laptop loss insurance does not cover theft if it is "left unattended in a room with public access". It might make sense to exclude getting high on unknown drugs in Thailand and stabbing yourself, or leaving your laptop on a truck stop cafe table while going to the toilet. But at the same time, having a few beers while on holiday, and leaving your laptop on your desk at a startup office are both things which reasonable, responsible people still often do. And would not expect to invalidate their insurance cover. Unfortunately nobody could explain to me the precise details of these clauses - what counts as a "result of" or "public access".