Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people don't make a point to go out of their way to avoid having rules applied if they're intending on following the rules. I don't think its that big of a leap. You're also misreading my comment. I'm not saying they definitely will do a sub-par job, but that its now an option, that they can do it. And given its the cheaper option (up front at least), it probably will happen more often. And especially when it co…
Once again this is a take predicated on bad assumptions. If you're just doing something and intend to meet or exceed the rules then dealing with government enforcement apparatus is pure overhead. You were always gonna do the right thing so you gain zero upside and have to deal with a potentially capricious and unaccountable (in any practical way) enforcer which is a huge downside. Second, the rules are chock full of…
There's a lot of upside to the fact the next owner isn't going to have to question if things were done properly, that insurance isn't going to be able to push back when something does go wrong.