7 ms·

Depends 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

Depends 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 ago
If 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 ago
  Why 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 ago
      I 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 ago
        What 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...
        sokoloff 6y ago
        If an insurance policy covers all physical damage perils and riots are not mentioned as an exclusion, then riots are covered. It's not like physical damage coverage itemizes every possible source of damage and those that aren't listed aren't covered. I'm literally not understanding your claim, so it seems like we are indeed having significant difficulty communicating. Because of the way contracts are written, I think your claim is pretty close to obviously false. Concretely: if riots are not covered, it is overwhelmingly likely that the contract will be structured as "physical damages are covered except as listed below" listed below: "riots are not covered"
        uoaei 6y ago
        If riots are not covered then they are not covered. It's as simple as that. I'm just saying you're making a whole lot of points without actually addressing the literal contents of my message, which would make this conversation much smoother because otherwise we are speaking past each other. It looks like that presumption is wrong because riots will be covered under the umbrella of "physical damage" but you haven't really explicitly made that point by addressing mine, so it's hard to move forward with you to a productive conversation.
        sokoloff 6y ago
        Yes, if riots are not covered, they're not covered, but that will generally be obvious to the purchaser of the insurance (specifically by virtue of a clause about riots being excluded being present in the contract, in contravention to your claim above that "the clause [about riots] won't be in any contract to begin with". It will be there as an explicit exclusion.). If the purchaser of the insurance makes the choice to purchase insurance which obviously and explicitly does not cover riots, they ought not be surprised when riots are not covered and it's not the insurer's fault.
stx 6y ago
Travel insurance did not cover my 2 week vacation I had planned in Florida in May. They would only cover it if I or a family member who was traveling with me was sick. I count myself lucky to have a job that I can do from home. Others have it way worse right now.

Depends 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 ago

If 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 ago
Why 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 ago
    I 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 ago
      What 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...
      - sokoloff 6y ago
        If an insurance policy covers all physical damage perils and riots are not mentioned as an exclusion, then riots are covered. It's not like physical damage coverage itemizes every possible source of damage and those that aren't listed aren't covered. I'm literally not understanding your claim, so it seems like we are indeed having significant difficulty communicating. Because of the way contracts are written, I think your claim is pretty close to obviously false. Concretely: if riots are not covered, it is overwhelmingly likely that the contract will be structured as "physical damages are covered except as listed below" listed below: "riots are not covered"
        uoaei 6y ago
        If riots are not covered then they are not covered. It's as simple as that. I'm just saying you're making a whole lot of points without actually addressing the literal contents of my message, which would make this conversation much smoother because otherwise we are speaking past each other. It looks like that presumption is wrong because riots will be covered under the umbrella of "physical damage" but you haven't really explicitly made that point by addressing mine, so it's hard to move forward with you to a productive conversation.
        sokoloff 6y ago
        Yes, if riots are not covered, they're not covered, but that will generally be obvious to the purchaser of the insurance (specifically by virtue of a clause about riots being excluded being present in the contract, in contravention to your claim above that "the clause [about riots] won't be in any contract to begin with". It will be there as an explicit exclusion.). If the purchaser of the insurance makes the choice to purchase insurance which obviously and explicitly does not cover riots, they ought not be surprised when riots are not covered and it's not the insurer's fault.

stx 6y ago

Travel insurance did not cover my 2 week vacation I had planned in Florida in May. They would only cover it if I or a family member who was traveling with me was sick. I count myself lucky to have a job that I can do from home. Others have it way worse right now.