5 ms·
Every time I see comments like this, and no direct offense intended, It always strikes me as coming from somebody who has never filed large insurance claims bef
by sky_rw 6y ago
Every time I see comments like this, and no direct offense intended, It always strikes me as coming from somebody who has never filed large insurance claims before. Been seeing this so much with riots lately, "oh you have insurance right, why you mad about your business getting destroyed?". If only it was that simple.
- inetknght 6y agoThe largest insurance claim I've had was for a little over $5k for a vehicle repair after collision while avoiding a pedestrian in the street. I'm not sure if you think that's "large" but it was very painless to do IMO.
- danson 6y agoThat's not large in this context. It would need to be large enough to cover several thousand pounds of legal defense fees to investigate and argue against the claim. So at least several tens of thousands of dollars. Source: been through insurance claim on a business that burnt to the ground with months of finished product stock (and which our accountant had accidentally under-insured. Very painful!)
- sfj 6y agoI wasn't able to collect on insurance for “damage not due to a collision” on my motorcycle when it blew over in strong wind, because the insurance agent said, “There was a collision. When your motorcycle fell over it collided with the ground.”
- kuzimoto 6y agoWhat does it cover? Isn't any sort of damage potentially a collision?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- kube-system 6y agoThat's BS, damage due to wind when nobody was occupying the vehicle is clearly an act of god and in no way was due to your control of the vehicle.
- Nextgrid 6y agoWould there be any recourse, possibly in court? I can't imagine that response passing muster in court, because as another commenter pointed out, all damage would involve some kind of collision between two objects which means that if we accept their response then the policy would be worthless because it wouldn't be able to cover anything. It's implied (in the context of motor vehicle insurance) that "collision" in their case means collision between two vehicles but they're now trying to be pedantic about it when it's in their favor.
- alistairSH 6y agoNope, not large. A friend had an Aston Martin that caught on fire. About a $120k car. It took months of investigations to close that claim. Insurance pointed finger at AM, AM wanted their own investigator, fire inspector involved, etc. And that’s not even large relative to a house or business.
- ganoushoreilly 6y agoI had a similar problem with an Audi except it was between the original person that hit me, the repair center thst did more damage and allowed the car to be flooded, and Audi. 9 months to sort out most of the car issues on a 95k car.
- AlexCoventry 6y agoI thought the idea with insurance was that they would pay out and deal with recovering the funds legally, if possible.
- dvtrn 6y agoThey don’t do this out of the goodness of their hearts, insurance is ‘better to have and not need than need and not have’ and the longer you can go paying premiums without needing to file a claim the better for the insurer (monetarily speaking)
- alistairSH 6y agoIn my limited experience with car accidents, they generally do. This car burst into flames overnight while parked. Turns out it was an electrical short in the dashboard wiring. But, cars don't often self-immolate, so the suspicion of wrong-doing caused a delay. I also don't know if they paid before the investigation was completely closed. They may have, but even at that, it was a few weeks.
- Melting_Harps 6y ago> And that’s not even large relative to a house or business. It's way worse for a business, when I went to the MDRS for a week the bistro's kitchen in our Flagship restaurant went up in flames. The cause was unknown, but all in we lost 4.5 weeks of work due to unnecessary down time, not including the equipment repairs, contractor labor and misc costs because the city's investigators wouldn't come out to assess the damage in the allotted time slot to investigate and approve the repairs because of snow (IT'S COLORADO!) and then the Insurance stonewalled and tried to delay things further by not playing nice with the city that delayed reopening. All told I wouldn't be surprised if we lost over a couple 100ks in lost profits and limited operational costs (we still had the bar/grill upstairs) and having to rebuild the Kitchen plus labor. Corporate paid us bonuses, which were really just 1/3 of our normal pay to help offset expenses, because of limited hours. Bourdain was right: restaurants really are horrible businesses. Insurance which is mandatory, compounded with local government regulations and approval, makes it way worse.
- messick 6y agoThat’s missing 5 or 6 zeros in order to be considered large.
- sky_rw 6y agoI can't think of a better comment to prove my point.
- virmundi 6y agoDepends on the insurer too. Riots might not be covered. Neither was pandemic. Sucks to be a small business right now. Anyone got first hand experience with SBA loans?
- uoaei 6y agoIf riots aren't covered in cities and neighborhoods with historical precedent of civil unrest, I don't think that's anyone's fault but the policy provider's.
- sokoloff 6y agoWhy the provider and not the purchaser who chose that insurance? It’s spelled out in the contract what you’re buying (and paying for).
- uoaei 6y ago"If riots aren't covered" the clause won't be in any contract to begin with.
- sokoloff 6y agoI think that's generally false. Policies are generally written to cover a broad set of risks (which would include riots, terrorism, and acts of war) and then have exceptions listed specifically. It would be rare in my experience for property insurance to itemize the types of losses they cover. As an example, my policy covers general losses arising from physical damage, but then explicitly excludes losses from earthquakes, floods, oil spills, and acts of war. If I buy only that coverage and a flood or earthquake damages my property, it's not my insurance company's fault that I'm not covered.
- uoaei 6y agoWhat I'm saying is obviously true. What you seem to be concerned about is that you think the premise is false. If that is so, you haven't really communicated that...
- CivBase 6y agoWatching Louis Rossman's videos on insurance recently has given me a whole new perspective on the subject. It's amazing just how much they get away with.
- jjeaff 6y agoI've seen a lot of shady insurance practices of trying to get out of paying claims, but that "pandemic insurance won't pay for coronavirus because sars-covid2 is not specifically mentioned in the policy" takes the cake. The policy actually specifically says that it covers "flu and sars and other types of coronaviruses". The fact that they are trying to waste people's time and money to litigate that out where they most certainly will not win is just unconscionable.
- giancarlostoro 6y agoHave not seen those yet but this should be a friendly reminder that insurance companies jobs are literally to do everything they possibly can to not pay you any damages or the least amount in damages. They are after all for profit organizations so whatever they can do to keep as much cash as possible is the goal.
- klyrs 6y agoMy dad was an insurance adjuster. He loved denying claims more than anything. "I'm not good at math, but I sure can subtract!" Fucker had a major power trip. Also had a slight anti-corporate bent, so he loved approving claims too.
- wutbrodo 6y agoHe loved denying claims and he loved approving claims? How does that not completely cancel out, except perhaps for "he loves his job"?
- klyrs 6y agoHe did love his job. He enjoyed handling hundred-million dollar checks, among other things. But the glee that he got out of denying a claim was perverse.
- taude 6y agoExactly. There's reason stores are proactively boarding up their store fronts, etc. to mitigate the change of having to go through the horrendous loses of business loss, and fighting insurance companies for money.