It really isn't fair to blame insurance at all. In this case they had insurance that covers the rentee against loss due to accidental damage or theft against th

It really isn't fair to blame insurance at all. In this case they had insurance that covers the rentee against loss due to accidental damage or theft against the rentee. That insurance is entirely reasonable and rational, and does have real value: If a legitimate, good actor person rents hardware and then it get stolen out of their car or they accidentally drop it in a lake, that's valuable insurance and does probably cover most incidents. But in this case the person theoretically covered by the insurance (their coverage obviously benefitting the one renting out the hardware, as their hardware is then made whole) is the one who caused the loss. Just as your homeowner insurance doesn't want to cover you if you burn down your own house on purpose -- the real moral hazard -- they don't want to cover this situation. It's shitty, but the insurance served a valuable but finite purpose. The insurance was never intended for what happened here.