Comment on

• Technologist@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  The liability of what, proving I was correct? Cause in my claims that’s what it’s done and made legal jobs much easier…

  source

  • WoodScientist@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    I’m struggling to think of a situation where having cameras will help you, the homeowner, with insurance claims. Let’s say someone fakes a slip and fall on the sidewalk out front of your house. Sure, your camera may prove they faked it. However, you’re not going to be the one actually paying that claim. Beyond the deductible, it won’t actually keep money from leaving your pocket.

    But there are plenty of cases where having a camera could result in the denial of a claim. Introducing video of yourself to an insurance claim opens up a can of worms of intentionality, negligence, and liability. And insurers will look for any flimsy excuse to rule a claim is not covered.

    At best, having cameras lets you avoid an insurance deductible from someone filing a fraudulent claim against you. But on the downside, it may result in entire claims being denied that you would otherwise have coverage for.

    source

    • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Often it’s not just a deductible, but increased rates after the claim.

      You can also just not provide the video, especially if your system is local. Just like you don’t tell someone that purposely brakes in front of you to cause an accident, that you have a dashcam. You tell the cop after the other person lies to them and gives their fake story.

      The insurance company would need to know that you have video in the first place, and then request that specifically. Last I checked they don’t usually give discounts for having video surveillance systems, so there is no reason to let them know it exists.

      source
    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      My only use case would be to see what is or was going on at the moment. But more for the fun or curiosity of it than actual security

      source