4 ms·

> People often pay electricians even for tasks that are just "flip a switch and turn some screws," after all. The ultimate reason people pay electricians is li

> People often pay electricians even for tasks that are just "flip a switch and turn some screws," after all. The ultimate reason people pay electricians is liability. Unlicensed work is an easy way to invalidate your homeowner's insurance, lose everything, and get sued for any damage to your neighbors' property (by their insurance company, no less).

version_five 5y ago
My view is that if the only reason you are doing something is because of the insurance implications, then you've surely made the wrong decision. Nobody's interests are less aligned with your own than an insurance company's. There are lots of legitimate reasons to hire an electrician, but making decisions solely based on what someone who wants you to perpetually give them money whole finding reasons to never give it back is never good practice.
- JadeNB 5y ago
  > My view is that if the only reason you are doing something is because of the insurance implications, then you've surely made the wrong decision. In this situation, I am paying someone else to assume risk for me. That is, I suppose, a type of insurance, in a very broad sense. However, I am not in any way relying on my interests and the other person's to be aligned, except in the sense of performing the work they are legally contracted to perform. All I am doing is asking this person to assume some risk for me, in exchange for which I provide them a fee. Short of "take on all the risk yourself", which, even if perhaps desirable (I'm not sure …), is often not feasible, what is a better approach here?
  - version_five 5y ago
    I see those as separate. Paying someone to take on risk I see a clear argument for. Its specifically the "do it this way because insurance wont cover you otherwise" that I'm reacting too, because I think that had caused a lot of damage to society. Effectively nobody is taking on risk under the model insurance companies push - insurance won't let you do anything risky, and won't pay if you do. That's why I say it's a losing proposition to have your behavior dictated by an insurer. (Probably a prisoner's dilemma really, because inevitably some group gives in, then makes to worse for everyone)
    - makeitdouble 5y ago
      This is a good point, and also a general fact of life I think. Society is not just modeled by laws, but also by influencial groups. If your company gets banned by visa/mastercard for dealing with porn, you’ll steer away for anything porn related. You know banks won’t give you a loan for growing legal weed, if your goal is actually to make money you’ll grow other fancy aromatic plants instead, etc. You still can push through, but getting nudged is not new, will never stop, and most of the time reflects your societies values anyway.
      - version_five 5y ago
        That's a good, concise description. My particular beef with this happening with respect to insurance is that it "nudges" us to all be risk averse and boring, and artificially prioritize safety over all kinds of other outcomes.
        makeitdouble 5y ago
        You are right on the distortion. Even safety can be kind of out of the wibdow with people taking their insurance's approval as a GO sign for otherwise detrimental behaviors, like building houses in submersible areas.
        R0b0t1 5y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_Eternity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_Eternity
    - a1369209993 5y ago
      > insurance won't let you do anything risky, and won't pay if you do. This is the part that is outright fraud. A legitimate insurance policy is literally a cheque; if something happens, you deposit it in the bank and get you money, and it's the insurance company's responsibility to prove that your claim is not covered by the policy written on the cheque. The insurance company does not make a decision about whether to pay.
- akiselev 5y ago
  Nobody's interests are less aligned with your own than an insurance company's when it comes time to pay out. Investigating a case is expensive, let alone litigating one against someone with their life's assets on the line, so it's in their best interest to prevent the event they're insuring against from occurring. They have the most accurate up to date data on real world outcomes so especially in professional circumstances, it usually pays to follow their advice.
  - orangeoxidation 5y ago
    > Nobody's interests are less aligned with your own than an insurance company's when it comes time to pay out. Yup. They know having an electrician do all the work minimizes the risk of you needing to get payed out, so they want it so. But the insurance doesn't care about your additional cost, since it's your cost, not theirs. They don't go "cost of professional < additional risk * potential damages", they go "additional risk * potential damages > 0". Then again, electrical work can be life threatening, so the potential damage is rather high.
    - IgorPartola 5y ago
      > Then again, electrical work can be life threatening, so the potential damage is rather high. As a DIYer, I was shocked to find what the previously hired professional electrician left for me: a secondary panel for the whole structure that controls exactly one outlet. The sub panel was apparently not fed from the main panel, but rather from a panel in a different building, so simply switching the main breaker of the breaker panel to off did not turn off that one specific outlet, you know the one I was trying to replace. Why that one outlet (GCFI in the bathroom) required it’s own sub panel was not clear at all but my left hand was numb for a few hours. Thankfully it didn’t go further than that (maybe a few copies of me in the multiverse died but not this one).
      - pininja 5y ago
        I just ordered a $15 Non Contact Voltage Detector after reading this. Glad you’re ok!
- makeitdouble 5y ago
  I generally agree with you, but electric work is different. Except if you’ve wired your whole house by yourself, having someone qualified and legally responsible for rewiring is important. Even if their own work is minimal, they also take responsibility for not fixing the previous work if there was anything that should have been noticed, and it’s a role you can’t take. On insurance, as you say their interests are opposite, and you need to be defensive about how to deal with them. Not having insurance on a house is not an option, so making sure you have a standing ground when shit hits the fan is pretty reasonable in my opinion.
  - jjeaff 5y ago
    https://www.reddit.com/r/HomeImprovement/comments/7vwe23/does_anyone_have_hard_evidence_that_homeowners/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HomeImprovement/comments/7vwe23/doe...
- gonzo41 5y ago
  In Australia we have 240V at the power point so i don't risk it. I know a guy, he's good and i don't mind paying him to avoid all the risks.
- Spooky23 5y ago
  All parties related to a home (owner, occupier, bank, insurer) have an interest in the asset they have a stake in. Home electric is one of those things that many people claim to know and understand. The reality is that most people are clueless, and can and do make mistakes. If you ever bought an old house, you get this — there’s always some dangerous cob job hiding somewhere. The evil insurance company doesn’t want to pay when you are seriously injured in a fire. You probably don’t want to get injured. In the end, interests are aligned.
- TheCoelacanth 5y ago
  The other way to view that is that insurers have put more work into quantifying risk than anyone else has.

version_five 5y ago

My view is that if the only reason you are doing something is because of the insurance implications, then you've surely made the wrong decision. Nobody's interests are less aligned with your own than an insurance company's. There are lots of legitimate reasons to hire an electrician, but making decisions solely based on what someone who wants you to perpetually give them money whole finding reasons to never give it back is never good practice.

JadeNB 5y ago
> My view is that if the only reason you are doing something is because of the insurance implications, then you've surely made the wrong decision. In this situation, I am paying someone else to assume risk for me. That is, I suppose, a type of insurance, in a very broad sense. However, I am not in any way relying on my interests and the other person's to be aligned, except in the sense of performing the work they are legally contracted to perform. All I am doing is asking this person to assume some risk for me, in exchange for which I provide them a fee. Short of "take on all the risk yourself", which, even if perhaps desirable (I'm not sure …), is often not feasible, what is a better approach here?
- version_five 5y ago
  I see those as separate. Paying someone to take on risk I see a clear argument for. Its specifically the "do it this way because insurance wont cover you otherwise" that I'm reacting too, because I think that had caused a lot of damage to society. Effectively nobody is taking on risk under the model insurance companies push - insurance won't let you do anything risky, and won't pay if you do. That's why I say it's a losing proposition to have your behavior dictated by an insurer. (Probably a prisoner's dilemma really, because inevitably some group gives in, then makes to worse for everyone)
  - makeitdouble 5y ago
    This is a good point, and also a general fact of life I think. Society is not just modeled by laws, but also by influencial groups. If your company gets banned by visa/mastercard for dealing with porn, you’ll steer away for anything porn related. You know banks won’t give you a loan for growing legal weed, if your goal is actually to make money you’ll grow other fancy aromatic plants instead, etc. You still can push through, but getting nudged is not new, will never stop, and most of the time reflects your societies values anyway.
    - version_five 5y ago
      That's a good, concise description. My particular beef with this happening with respect to insurance is that it "nudges" us to all be risk averse and boring, and artificially prioritize safety over all kinds of other outcomes.
      - makeitdouble 5y ago
        You are right on the distortion. Even safety can be kind of out of the wibdow with people taking their insurance's approval as a GO sign for otherwise detrimental behaviors, like building houses in submersible areas.
      - R0b0t1 5y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_Eternity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_Eternity
  - a1369209993 5y ago
    > insurance won't let you do anything risky, and won't pay if you do. This is the part that is outright fraud. A legitimate insurance policy is literally a cheque; if something happens, you deposit it in the bank and get you money, and it's the insurance company's responsibility to prove that your claim is not covered by the policy written on the cheque. The insurance company does not make a decision about whether to pay.
akiselev 5y ago
Nobody's interests are less aligned with your own than an insurance company's when it comes time to pay out. Investigating a case is expensive, let alone litigating one against someone with their life's assets on the line, so it's in their best interest to prevent the event they're insuring against from occurring. They have the most accurate up to date data on real world outcomes so especially in professional circumstances, it usually pays to follow their advice.
- orangeoxidation 5y ago
  > Nobody's interests are less aligned with your own than an insurance company's when it comes time to pay out. Yup. They know having an electrician do all the work minimizes the risk of you needing to get payed out, so they want it so. But the insurance doesn't care about your additional cost, since it's your cost, not theirs. They don't go "cost of professional < additional risk * potential damages", they go "additional risk * potential damages > 0". Then again, electrical work can be life threatening, so the potential damage is rather high.
  - IgorPartola 5y ago
    > Then again, electrical work can be life threatening, so the potential damage is rather high. As a DIYer, I was shocked to find what the previously hired professional electrician left for me: a secondary panel for the whole structure that controls exactly one outlet. The sub panel was apparently not fed from the main panel, but rather from a panel in a different building, so simply switching the main breaker of the breaker panel to off did not turn off that one specific outlet, you know the one I was trying to replace. Why that one outlet (GCFI in the bathroom) required it’s own sub panel was not clear at all but my left hand was numb for a few hours. Thankfully it didn’t go further than that (maybe a few copies of me in the multiverse died but not this one).
    - pininja 5y ago
      I just ordered a $15 Non Contact Voltage Detector after reading this. Glad you’re ok!
makeitdouble 5y ago
I generally agree with you, but electric work is different. Except if you’ve wired your whole house by yourself, having someone qualified and legally responsible for rewiring is important. Even if their own work is minimal, they also take responsibility for not fixing the previous work if there was anything that should have been noticed, and it’s a role you can’t take. On insurance, as you say their interests are opposite, and you need to be defensive about how to deal with them. Not having insurance on a house is not an option, so making sure you have a standing ground when shit hits the fan is pretty reasonable in my opinion.
- jjeaff 5y ago
  https://www.reddit.com/r/HomeImprovement/comments/7vwe23/does_anyone_have_hard_evidence_that_homeowners/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HomeImprovement/comments/7vwe23/doe...
gonzo41 5y ago
In Australia we have 240V at the power point so i don't risk it. I know a guy, he's good and i don't mind paying him to avoid all the risks.
Spooky23 5y ago
All parties related to a home (owner, occupier, bank, insurer) have an interest in the asset they have a stake in. Home electric is one of those things that many people claim to know and understand. The reality is that most people are clueless, and can and do make mistakes. If you ever bought an old house, you get this — there’s always some dangerous cob job hiding somewhere. The evil insurance company doesn’t want to pay when you are seriously injured in a fire. You probably don’t want to get injured. In the end, interests are aligned.
TheCoelacanth 5y ago
The other way to view that is that insurers have put more work into quantifying risk than anyone else has.