Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 712 posts

Re: Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

#11

Post by egeozcan »

antisthenes wrote: post #7

Undeclared trampolines? What kind of insurance is this? I don't remember my house insurance (or medical, or any other kind really) being this detailed. I just picked rough estimates for the value of my structure and the items inside, and that was about it? There might have also been a waiver about not doing any hazardous activities like open fires or storing chemicals on the property. It definitely wasn't this detail…

After reading that, my mind is generating weird scenarios in which undeclared trampolines are causing tragedies.

Trampolines can indeed cause accidents but is that big of a risk to have one? That feels so out of place it's beyond comical.

Re: Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

#12

Post by sircastor »

I'm going to assume that nobody's insurance premiums or deductibles are going down from this data. No analysis is making the insurer say "Oh, that roof is in much better condition despite its age."

Insurance feels like the biggest scam in the history of the world. You are legally obligated to pay us for nothing, most of the time.

Re: Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

#13

Post by lukevp »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #8
malfist wrote: post #4

If insurance is individually priced to this degree, what's the point of insurance?

If you can afford to rebuild your house after a fire, there will be no point (and there never was a point). Insurance has always been a negative-EV trade for the average person, but there have been mispricings that make it positive-EV when you have more information than the insurance company. However, the inefficiency meant that you also had to pay for the uncertainty on their estimate of your risk. With less uncerta…

Plus the salaries of the sales teams and the marketing budget and the executive bonuses and fancy offices… or were you rolling all that up into “cost to assess”?

Re: Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

#14

Post by mikepurvis »

egeozcan wrote: post #11
antisthenes wrote: post #7

Undeclared trampolines? What kind of insurance is this? I don't remember my house insurance (or medical, or any other kind really) being this detailed. I just picked rough estimates for the value of my structure and the items inside, and that was about it? There might have also been a waiver about not doing any hazardous activities like open fires or storing chemicals on the property. It definitely wasn't this detail…

After reading that, my mind is generating weird scenarios in which undeclared trampolines are causing tragedies. Trampolines can indeed cause accidents but is that big of a risk to have one? That feels so out of place it's beyond comical.

Probably a case of trying to get something out of the information that happens to be available. Maybe they’ll also adjust your rates based when you get your roof redone or whether you park in your driveway?

Re: Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

#15

Post by flutas »

egeozcan wrote: post #11
antisthenes wrote: post #7

Undeclared trampolines? What kind of insurance is this? I don't remember my house insurance (or medical, or any other kind really) being this detailed. I just picked rough estimates for the value of my structure and the items inside, and that was about it? There might have also been a waiver about not doing any hazardous activities like open fires or storing chemicals on the property. It definitely wasn't this detail…

After reading that, my mind is generating weird scenarios in which undeclared trampolines are causing tragedies. Trampolines can indeed cause accidents but is that big of a risk to have one? That feels so out of place it's beyond comical.

It's probably about risk more than anything.

Trampoline installed well (i.e. staked down) with proper netting = who cares

Trampoline unsecured, no net = wind risk, personal injury risk, death risk

Re: Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

#16

Post by secabeen »

egeozcan wrote: post #11
antisthenes wrote: post #7

Undeclared trampolines? What kind of insurance is this? I don't remember my house insurance (or medical, or any other kind really) being this detailed. I just picked rough estimates for the value of my structure and the items inside, and that was about it? There might have also been a waiver about not doing any hazardous activities like open fires or storing chemicals on the property. It definitely wasn't this detail…

After reading that, my mind is generating weird scenarios in which undeclared trampolines are causing tragedies. Trampolines can indeed cause accidents but is that big of a risk to have one? That feels so out of place it's beyond comical.

Generally yes, because the liability for injury would be on you, as the trampoline owner. Compare the probability of a guest breaking their leg when visiting your home vs if you have an unsafe trampoline. Insurers are prepared for the small risk in the former, but have not priced in the latter risk to a standard policy.

Re: Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

#17

Post by landedgentry »

I'm less concerned about the spying and more concerned about insurance companies arbitrarily non-renewing policies with no recourse for the consumer. Insurance is heavily regulated for good reason, and insurance should be a source of stability instead of anxiety.

Re: Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

#18

Post by mb7733 »

sircastor wrote: post #12

I'm going to assume that nobody's insurance premiums or deductibles are going down from this data. No analysis is making the insurer say "Oh, that roof is in much better condition despite its age." Insurance feels like the biggest scam in the history of the world. You are legally obligated to pay us for nothing, most of the time.

This doesn't make sense. If an insurance company wanted to charge higher premiums, they would just do so. They wouldn't need to spy on customers.

The point of them trying to quantify risk as accurately as possible is to be able to extract profit while also offering competitive rates.

It's the same as with any other company. They try and operate as efficiently as possible (ie. reduce costs) to try and make more profit, while competing on price.

Re: Home insurers are dropping customers based on aerial images

#19

Post by throwaway74432 »

Related, my vehicle insurer keeps jacking up the rates. I've never been in an accident or had a ticket, and I drive 2000 miles per year. But every year up up up. Then they offer I install a tracking device on my car to get my rates back down to a reasonable amount. There seems to be a pattern of insurers wanting to know everything about everyone, and using irrationally higher rates to coerce consent. And I have to pay it or consent to tracking because insurance is mandated by law.
Post reply on HN