Comment by NoMoreNicksLeft
12 hours ago
>By assurance, not that I get a payout, but rather the company has sufficient QA to avoid a payout.
They also have sufficient insurance that a payout doesn't tank their company. I don't think their risk avoidance translates into your risk avoidance.
>>By assurance, not that I get a payout, but rather the company has sufficient QA to avoid a payout. > They also have sufficient insurance that a payout doesn't tank their company. I don't think their risk avoidance translates into your risk avoidance.
The insurance company doesnt want a payout though -- they will ensure certain certifications. Also, insurance companies will not payout (and hence bankrupt the company) in cases of fraud or gross negligence.
The system is not perfect, but it exists to align interests.
The insurance company doesnt want a payout though -- they will ensure certain certifications.
Those certifications aren't worth as much as I thought they were. I just took apart a UL-certified power strip with scorched plastic, which is a significant fire hazard. It had an LED that was fed from the 120V line through a 15K 0.5-watt resistor.
a UL certification will hardly be the only one in place for a commercial insurance firm to guarantee a jacuzzi. Just imagine the risk of electrocution.
Just look at it from a retail standpoint -- perhaps you have car insurance.
- (where I live) You are forced to have a driver's license
- (where I live) Even if your spouse claims not to drive, they wont insure me unless all other adults in my household have licenses
- i'm forced to pay more if i drive an unsafe car vs a safe one
- I can pay less if I have a LoJack or other safety device
- I can pay further less if I take a driver's safety course which runs 5hrs long
- I can pay further less if I install a OBD-2 device sharing my driver behavior
- I risk having my insurance cancelled If I do something bad (DUI)
- I risk having no payout if I do something illegal