3 ms·

The technicality in six point font is the risk you're not allowed to take because it would cost you more. The whole point of it is to spread this risk out as br

The technicality in six point font is the risk you're not allowed to take because it would cost you more. The whole point of it is to spread this risk out as broadly as possible for the cheapest price possible based on known risk. Known risk requires some boundaries. (I'm not talking about trying not to pay legit claims that clearly are within the threshold) but the reason these boundaries are there is so they can accurately price the risk. It would be much more expensive to get a policy that covered "everything" without the fine print, but you certainly can. It's just out of most people's price range. That is not to say I think insurers are acting in good faith all the time, just that I empathize with the actual purpose of insurance and the complexity of the risk calculations for insurance actuaries.

syshum 6y ago
While I understand that, the risk IMO needs to be more generalized For example I am from the Midwest, we get tornado's here and one of the routine ways that insurance companies try to get out of paying is to classify the damage as "strait line winds" because apparently if wind is traveling in a strait line insurance does not pay but if it moves in a circle then we have a winner. My Insurance for Storm Damage should cover all storm damage not have these weird exclusion based on the type of storm Insurance is like Microsoft Licensing, no one can understand it and no matter what you buy you do not ever have the "right" insurance If I have Fire Insurance, it should cover me if my house burns down. if I have Pandemic Insurance it should cover me during a pandemic, if I have business interruption insurance it should cover me if my business is interrupted, etc etc etc I understand that a policy can not cover "everything" but I also so not believe that the insurance company should be allowed to sell "Storm Damage Insurance" then proceed to fine print out many many many types of storms... That should be considered deceptive business practice if not fraud We have a real problem with Truth in Advertising for Insurance (and many other industries). IMO we should be seeing billion dollar fines coming out of the FTC on a weekly basis if deceptive business practices were aggressively enforced as they should be, instead i can not recall the last time the FTC even investigated anyone... Probably was the "strongly worded letter" they sent to electronics manufacturers about their illegal void if removed stickers

syshum 6y ago

While I understand that, the risk IMO needs to be more generalized For example I am from the Midwest, we get tornado's here and one of the routine ways that insurance companies try to get out of paying is to classify the damage as "strait line winds" because apparently if wind is traveling in a strait line insurance does not pay but if it moves in a circle then we have a winner. My Insurance for Storm Damage should cover all storm damage not have these weird exclusion based on the type of storm Insurance is like Microsoft Licensing, no one can understand it and no matter what you buy you do not ever have the "right" insurance If I have Fire Insurance, it should cover me if my house burns down. if I have Pandemic Insurance it should cover me during a pandemic, if I have business interruption insurance it should cover me if my business is interrupted, etc etc etc I understand that a policy can not cover "everything" but I also so not believe that the insurance company should be allowed to sell "Storm Damage Insurance" then proceed to fine print out many many many types of storms... That should be considered deceptive business practice if not fraud We have a real problem with Truth in Advertising for Insurance (and many other industries). IMO we should be seeing billion dollar fines coming out of the FTC on a weekly basis if deceptive business practices were aggressively enforced as they should be, instead i can not recall the last time the FTC even investigated anyone... Probably was the "strongly worded letter" they sent to electronics manufacturers about their illegal void if removed stickers