8 ms·

Interesting that your liability insurance covered everything without question since there are a few obvious points of fault/negligence with the hotel (if a stra

Interesting that your liability insurance covered everything without question since there are a few obvious points of fault/negligence with the hotel (if a stray drunk patron can destroy their IT equipment, somebody fucked up, not to mention how a sink should generally not overflow from just being left on.

xmprt 4y ago
When people say their "liability insurance covered" something it probably means the insurance also fought whoever they could so that they had to pay as little as possible. In this case, it's possible they went after the hotel for negligence as well.
- mey 4y ago
  I feel like that is one of the overlooked values you have in having insurance coverage. You can resolve the issue with your provider and let them go to bat downstream, claw back anything they need to, without destroying your own life.
  - Breza 4y ago
    Totally agree. There's the obvious part of insurance: If there's a 1% chance of something bad costing you $1000, you can buy insurance for $12. Then there's the less obvious part, which is that the insurance company might only have to pay $900 for the same risk that would cost you $1000.
  - tylergetsay 4y ago
    I had an overfilled tub that resulted in a similiar result however much smaller (~8k in damage). I talked to the people who fixed it and they had an extremely set process to document everything and satisfy the insurance company. I suspect its less that they fight but more that they set the market price for repairs. Multiple worksheets from various insurance groups to document the moisture content, square footage affected, pictures, etc.
killingtime74 4y ago
Perhaps it was reduced by a percentage for contributory negligence I’m not sure OP would know all the facts (he just knows he dosent have to pay)
- bsuvc 4y ago
  I think the term you mean is comparative negligence. Contributory negligence would decline all coverage if the insured in any way contributed to the event. I'm guessing the hotel filed a property damage claim with their insurance, who then sued the commenter, whose liability insurance worked things out with the hotel's insurance company. You're right, the commenter would be covered 100%, but their insurance might have only paid out a fraction.
  - killingtime74 4y ago
    Ah, I’m an Australian lawyer and used a term of art which you might not in the states. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributory_negligence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributory_negligence (apparently it’s a similar concept you have in comparative negligence)
raptor99 4y ago
You missed the part where they barfed in it.
- charcircuit 4y ago
  there is an overflow drain hole it case the main one gets plugged
  - jhugo 4y ago
    if you look how that works it usually rejoins the main drain above the trap. so if the clog was lower than that it wouldn't help. a well-designed hotel bathroom should have a separate floor drain though.
  - Cthulhu_ 4y ago
    In my experience, those can't drain as fast as a tap can output water. They are pretty noisy when water does reach it though.
vba616 4y ago
>a sink should generally not overflow from just being left on I once thought all bathroom sinks had a little drain hole in the side to prevent overflows. But not all do. (in places I've lived in my area of the US)
- dev_tty01 4y ago
  That little drain feeds into the same pipe and trap. If the pipe is clogged, that little drain hole is useless. The purpose of the drain hole is saving your bacon when you intentionally plug the sink drain to collect some water and then forget to turn it off.
- voidfunc 4y ago
  Depending on how clogged the drain is, ive seen those be useless before. The general case for those to be useful is that main drain is only blocked because the user closed it purposely. If the drain is clogged it becomes pointless-ish
  - tylergetsay 4y ago
    this also assumes the tub doesn't put out water faster than the drain can handle (from experience..)
    - DiggyJohnson 4y ago
      Yea my bathtub has one of these that helpfully increases the window between “the right level” and “overflow eminent” by about 4x the fill rate without the overflow drain, but certainly can’t handle the extra water indefinitely. I became fascinated by this metric/window when I almost overflowed the tub when I missed a timer. Y’all know that post about the importance of walking and getting off your phone? I’m your altogether-normal, socialized coworker that’s in the bathtub 2:30-3:00PM doing pretty much the same thing being described there. What a place to be and think! Sorry I can’t respond to your IM right this second, I’m thinking about the fill rate of my glorious tub, it’s failsafe features, the pothos over my head, the spider friend in the corner, and - before you get too concerned - whether these new bugs warrant further review of network architecture we’re building out. I love the tub, and I make no apologies for it. Good morning HN, thanks for reading.
lumost 4y ago
The hotel could likely point to legally binding terms that the occupant is responsible for all damages. Insurance companies are used to dealing with "odd" events where many things have to go wrong.
- eru 4y ago
  Not sure how legally binding those terms are? There's a lot of terms that you can physically write into a contract, but that courts won't enforce against retail customers.
ornornor 4y ago
I have an extra rider on my policy that waives negligence, maybe parent did too?

xmprt 4y ago

When people say their "liability insurance covered" something it probably means the insurance also fought whoever they could so that they had to pay as little as possible. In this case, it's possible they went after the hotel for negligence as well.

mey 4y ago
I feel like that is one of the overlooked values you have in having insurance coverage. You can resolve the issue with your provider and let them go to bat downstream, claw back anything they need to, without destroying your own life.
- Breza 4y ago
  Totally agree. There's the obvious part of insurance: If there's a 1% chance of something bad costing you $1000, you can buy insurance for $12. Then there's the less obvious part, which is that the insurance company might only have to pay $900 for the same risk that would cost you $1000.
- tylergetsay 4y ago
  I had an overfilled tub that resulted in a similiar result however much smaller (~8k in damage). I talked to the people who fixed it and they had an extremely set process to document everything and satisfy the insurance company. I suspect its less that they fight but more that they set the market price for repairs. Multiple worksheets from various insurance groups to document the moisture content, square footage affected, pictures, etc.

killingtime74 4y ago

Perhaps it was reduced by a percentage for contributory negligence I’m not sure OP would know all the facts (he just knows he dosent have to pay)

bsuvc 4y ago
I think the term you mean is comparative negligence. Contributory negligence would decline all coverage if the insured in any way contributed to the event. I'm guessing the hotel filed a property damage claim with their insurance, who then sued the commenter, whose liability insurance worked things out with the hotel's insurance company. You're right, the commenter would be covered 100%, but their insurance might have only paid out a fraction.
- killingtime74 4y ago
  Ah, I’m an Australian lawyer and used a term of art which you might not in the states. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributory_negligence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributory_negligence (apparently it’s a similar concept you have in comparative negligence)

raptor99 4y ago

You missed the part where they barfed in it.

charcircuit 4y ago
there is an overflow drain hole it case the main one gets plugged
- jhugo 4y ago
  if you look how that works it usually rejoins the main drain above the trap. so if the clog was lower than that it wouldn't help. a well-designed hotel bathroom should have a separate floor drain though.
- Cthulhu_ 4y ago
  In my experience, those can't drain as fast as a tap can output water. They are pretty noisy when water does reach it though.

vba616 4y ago

>a sink should generally not overflow from just being left on I once thought all bathroom sinks had a little drain hole in the side to prevent overflows. But not all do. (in places I've lived in my area of the US)

dev_tty01 4y ago
That little drain feeds into the same pipe and trap. If the pipe is clogged, that little drain hole is useless. The purpose of the drain hole is saving your bacon when you intentionally plug the sink drain to collect some water and then forget to turn it off.
voidfunc 4y ago
Depending on how clogged the drain is, ive seen those be useless before. The general case for those to be useful is that main drain is only blocked because the user closed it purposely. If the drain is clogged it becomes pointless-ish
- tylergetsay 4y ago
  this also assumes the tub doesn't put out water faster than the drain can handle (from experience..)
  - DiggyJohnson 4y ago
    Yea my bathtub has one of these that helpfully increases the window between “the right level” and “overflow eminent” by about 4x the fill rate without the overflow drain, but certainly can’t handle the extra water indefinitely. I became fascinated by this metric/window when I almost overflowed the tub when I missed a timer. Y’all know that post about the importance of walking and getting off your phone? I’m your altogether-normal, socialized coworker that’s in the bathtub 2:30-3:00PM doing pretty much the same thing being described there. What a place to be and think! Sorry I can’t respond to your IM right this second, I’m thinking about the fill rate of my glorious tub, it’s failsafe features, the pothos over my head, the spider friend in the corner, and - before you get too concerned - whether these new bugs warrant further review of network architecture we’re building out. I love the tub, and I make no apologies for it. Good morning HN, thanks for reading.

lumost 4y ago

The hotel could likely point to legally binding terms that the occupant is responsible for all damages. Insurance companies are used to dealing with "odd" events where many things have to go wrong.

eru 4y ago
Not sure how legally binding those terms are? There's a lot of terms that you can physically write into a contract, but that courts won't enforce against retail customers.

ornornor 4y ago

I have an extra rider on my policy that waives negligence, maybe parent did too?