4 ms·
After having had a home flood and another burn, and being refused a claim in each case (the flood was caused by a river, and so isn’t covered, and the fire was
by madaxe_again 3y ago
After having had a home flood and another burn, and being refused a claim in each case (the flood was caused by a river, and so isn’t covered, and the fire was a wildfire, and also isn’t covered - only fires starting in the property are covered - same for our truck that was incinerated), I no longer bother with home or vehicle insurance - if they don’t pay out, there’s no point in having it. Come to think of it the only insurance claim I ever had pay out was when I deliberately set out to defraud an insurer. Never have they paid out in a situation where it would have been helpful.
I would wager others will follow the same way, once they realise their policies are just a tax that they get no benefit from, and then insurers will have to come up with some new racket to defraud marks.
- t3rabytes 3y agoThat's not really an option for almost anyone with a mortgage on a home -- the lender will require home insurance with themselves listed as the primary payee. Same with an auto loan for most lenders (Lightspeed being one of the abnormal ones that doesn't hold the title to the vehicle as collateral).
- madaxe_again 3y agoSure, but if the lenders find themselves out of pocket because insurers repeatedly refuse to pay, they will change behaviour too - such as by no longer lending. Also, no such requirement in the U.K. - 3rd party vehicle insurance is mandatory, but home insurance is up to you - no lender I’ve ever had has mandated it.