Not sure why downvoted, if the clause actually reads like that it seems like insurance companies stacking the odds in their favor. Like a casino that reserves t

Not sure why downvoted, if the clause actually reads like that it seems like insurance companies stacking the odds in their favor. Like a casino that reserves the right to kick you out if you're winning. Even if I can deduce it might be delayed, that's far from certainty. I take insurance only when I reasonably expect to encounter incidents. Does this make all my policies invalid? When the company "reasonably deduces" that there will be no delays do they give me the money back? I hope they are reserving this clause for such obvious fraud cases where they can prove prior knowledge and intent. Like the case of this woman who even created fake identities to carry out the plan. Otherwise I see them being stuck in court forever either trying to prove that a random customer had some sort of insight that they didn't despite literally being their job and investing (tens of) millions in this. Or trying to prove that they didn't knowingly sell a policy with the expectation that they will never provide the payout, which is misrepresentation of the service at the very least.