|
|
|
|
|
|
by secabeen
4155 days ago
|
|
|
The issue he (and I) have, is that this is worst-first thinking. Sure, your insurance company could deny you coverage, but it's very unlikely. In the absence of evidence that insurance companies do this (and insurance regulators allow it), we should act under the more likely outcome rather than an hypothetical worst-case scenario. That's why he asked if you were in the lock or insurance industry. Someone with experience in these matters would be qualified to speculate on the importance of taking this into consideration. Without that expertise, rhetoric like this feels like advice to always wear a helmet in case of flying debris. Well-meaning, but unrealistic. |
|
|
It isn't "worst-first" thinking, it is "ok, I'm replacing a critical component, does this replacement meet all the the required specifications of the thing I am replacing it with? What are the potential consequences?" Which takes almost no time, its just a question that needs to be answered in my field.
Perhaps my work in such a regulated environment has taught me to think that way.
I have family in the insurance business, and they've talked about having to deny claims for various (kinda silly in a way) reasons. And getting death threats because of it...