A refused claim is (legally) an event that was never covered by the insurance, and is therefore irrelevant if the question is “take policy A or not at all”.
After all, if that event occurred without insurance, it is still not covered.
However, this is important to consider when comparing different policies with different amounts of coverage. Eg “comprehensive” car insurance compared with “third party, fire, and theft”.
“Rates” of unpaid claims only make sense in a situation where the law allows the insurer to breach their contracts. In that situation, the value of insurance plummets, and possibly reaches zero.
>A refused claim is (legally) an event that was never covered by the insurance, and is therefore irrelevant if the question is “take policy A or not at all”.
This implicitly assumes all legal cases are clear-cut and independent of perspective or legally-related capabilities; and also perfect knowledge of the fine print (which is desirable but not always realistic).
Usually the insurance company has more relevant experience, better specialized lawyers and generally more resources to spend fighting claims than the consumer. So they can often successfully claim that your particular circumstances are not covered after the fact, even when you believe they were.
A refused claim is (legally) an event that was never covered by the insurance, and is therefore irrelevant if the question is “take policy A or not at all”.
After all, if that event occurred without insurance, it is still not covered.
However, this is important to consider when comparing different policies with different amounts of coverage. Eg “comprehensive” car insurance compared with “third party, fire, and theft”.
“Rates” of unpaid claims only make sense in a situation where the law allows the insurer to breach their contracts. In that situation, the value of insurance plummets, and possibly reaches zero.
>A refused claim is (legally) an event that was never covered by the insurance, and is therefore irrelevant if the question is “take policy A or not at all”.
This implicitly assumes all legal cases are clear-cut and independent of perspective or legally-related capabilities; and also perfect knowledge of the fine print (which is desirable but not always realistic).
Usually the insurance company has more relevant experience, better specialized lawyers and generally more resources to spend fighting claims than the consumer. So they can often successfully claim that your particular circumstances are not covered after the fact, even when you believe they were.