EEVblog Lab FLOODED!

[Jeroen3]

What prevents you from moving insurance to some other firm? Do they share data?

[Fungus]

What prevents you from moving insurance to some other firm? Do they share data?

Of course they do!

Your insurance history follows you around just like your credit history does.

[langwadt]

Stuff happenes, you make a claim and then the premium doubles?

maybe not double but increase. Insurance is, like gambling, about statistics and odds. Insurance companies crunch
as much data as they can get their hands on to calculate their odds and making a claim affects those odds

[Red Squirrel]

Yeah that's what I find weird too.  You'd think they would want to cover it...  But I guess it's cheaper for them to let you put in a couple claims, and then they can just drop you.  My parents had a bunch of separate unfortunate events happen in a row and had to do several claims in a row, and the next claim they do, they are getting dropped as a customer.   You get around 3-4 claims max.  This is not really something they tell you and it might differ between companies.

this is probably written in the contract as "we reserve the right to change the terms of ... " ? yea?

Probably, these type of things tend to have lot of fine print stuff tied to them.

[Bud]

Stuff happenes, you make a claim and then the premium doubles?

maybe not double but increase. Insurance is, like gambling, about statistics and odds. Insurance companies crunch
as much data as they can get their hands on to calculate their odds and making a claim affects those odds

I thought insurance industry is all about greed and lobbying, not mathematics.

[EEVblog]

Stuff happenes, you make a claim and then the premium doubles?

Yep. It make people think twice about claiming.
Sure, you could claim for that carpet, but ... your premium will be $300 higher for the next few years so do the math first.
Insurance companies are parasites when it comes to small claims. If you own several properties then you're better off insuring against complete disaster (which is usually cheap) and then paying for the small stuff yourself.

But the contents insurance effectively "comes for free" with the liability cover.
Ok, let's say you have 10 properties like my lab. $300/year for insurance that includes contents and liability and other stuff I posted before.
New carpet for that size place is $3k, let's say I claim it and my insurance magically increases to $400 for all my properties (that's pretty extreme, but we'll run with that).
So I used to pay $3000/year for insurance on 10 properties, and now I pay $4000, $1000 extra. It would take 3 years of insurance premium increases before I am worse off, at which point the premium is likely to have come back down because I haven't made another claim.
Maybe you could make an argument this worthwhile, but remember the huge thing is not only don't you have contents insurance, you don't have liability cover or any other cover.
Would you really run 10 properties without any liability cover? If so you are insane. It's not just about contents.

I asked my insurance guy last year who much the insurance costs without the contents cover and he said it's hardly any difference, like 10's dollars.

[EEVblog]

Stuff happenes, you make a claim and then the premium doubles?

I just asked my insurance guy and he said no, not for small claims like this there really isn't penalty. He said $6k is nothing. They only care about the huge liability claims.
And if they did raise the premium he said he'd simply look for another one more competitive. Competition is fierce in the commercial insurance sector, that is why it's (relatively) cheap.
We had a liability claim in this building, someone slipped on the premises but strata were not liable because the slip happened in a private parking spot. This kind of stuff is why you need liability cover, and you get contents for free essentially.

[HalFET]

I thought insurance industry is all about greed and lobbying, not mathematics.

Math is very effective at optimising greed!  

But kind of curious, don't you have to replace the wood legs of your lab tables as well? Pine tends to be quite bad in terms of dealing with water.

[Wollvieh]

This is what cover I get for $306 a year. $195 actually, but there are extra government levies like fire levy etc that bring it up to $306
You'd be insane not to have this, the cost is a pittance.
There is an 8th one on another page that covers government audit costs

Even the walls are insured against theft (policy 2), that's one hell of a really comprehensive insurance.

I still can hardly believe that there's no damage, as according to Murphy the rain seems to have picked the most expensive corner. The flir cam might be waterproof, but optics tend to be allergic even against moisture, not to speak of getting showered. On the other hand I almost regularly salvage gear from weather exposed dumpsters which is still in fine condition even after intense rain. The rain mostly doesn't get far inside, not even trough vent grilles from printers or flatscreens. So all the stuff that just got sprayed onto from the outside will be ok. Maybe the soldering station needs to be heated up to get rid of moisture residue.

There should be a liability of the landlord or whoever is responsible for the leaking pipe, so no need to use your own insurance. If somebody crashes into your parked car you surely would also prefer to get him pay your damage even if you had fully comprehensive cover. Even under  'strawn (sorry don't know if there's a written form for that) "she'll be right".

[EEVblog]

There should be a liability of the landlord or whoever is responsible for the leaking pipe, so no need to use your own insurance. If somebody crashes into your parked car you surely would also prefer to get him pay your damage even if you had fully comprehensive cover. Even under  'strawn (sorry don't know if there's a written form for that) "she'll be right".

That's not how it work in cases like this.
Assuming the building is designed to a minimum standard then freak hail storms can cause damage without it being the fault of the building strata. In these cases there is no one at fault (unlike someoen crashing into your car) and so you have to use your own contents insurance to cover any damage.

[nctnico]

Maybe you could make an argument this worthwhile, but remember the huge thing is not only don't you have contents insurance, you don't have liability cover or any other cover.
Would you really run 10 properties without any liability cover? If so you are insane. It's not just about contents.

Perhaps the building owner has a liability cover but only when the claim exceeds a large amount. That might save a whole lot of insurance premiums.

[EEVblog]

Maybe you could make an argument this worthwhile, but remember the huge thing is not only don't you have contents insurance, you don't have liability cover or any other cover.
Would you really run 10 properties without any liability cover? If so you are insane. It's not just about contents.

Perhaps the building owner has a liability cover but only when the claim exceeds a large amount. That might save a whole lot of insurance premiums.

Again, that's not how it works. Carpet is the personal contents of the owner, it's only covered under owner contents insurance policy.

[nctnico]

Maybe you could make an argument this worthwhile, but remember the huge thing is not only don't you have contents insurance, you don't have liability cover or any other cover.
Would you really run 10 properties without any liability cover? If so you are insane. It's not just about contents.

Perhaps the building owner has a liability cover but only when the claim exceeds a large amount. That might save a whole lot of insurance premiums.

Again, that's not how it works. Carpet is the personal contents of the owner, it's only covered under owner contents insurance policy.

You lost me here. What I understand is that contents insurance costs peanuts so it is likely to be included with a liability insurance. From the lack of contents insurance you seem to assume that the building owner doesn't even have liability insurance. My point is that that assumption may not be true.

[EEVblog]

Maybe you could make an argument this worthwhile, but remember the huge thing is not only don't you have contents insurance, you don't have liability cover or any other cover.
Would you really run 10 properties without any liability cover? If so you are insane. It's not just about contents.

Perhaps the building owner has a liability cover but only when the claim exceeds a large amount. That might save a whole lot of insurance premiums.

Again, that's not how it works. Carpet is the personal contents of the owner, it's only covered under owner contents insurance policy.

You lost me here. What I understand is that contents insurance costs peanuts so it is likely to be included with a liability insurance.

Correct.

From the lack of contents insurance you seem to assume that the building owner doesn't even have liability insurance. My point is that that assumption may not be true.

The building owner, i.e. the strata has liability and contents insurance, but that "contents" insurance does not extend to items within individual owner units, i.e. carpet.
If the carpet in the building foyer or hallways was damaged, yes, building strata contents covers that, but once you go inside the door of a unit it's up the individual owner to provide that insurance.
The owner of my unit is not the owner of the building, he is just the owner of the unit I am in. As an owner he can join the strata committee and have a say in the building insurance, but he (and his unit) personally is not covered by that strata insurance.

I know all this because I own a unit nearby and am on the strata committee.