Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

438 | 439 | 440

 ... 487

Next

a548456

a548456

United Kingdom
OLD SKOOL

SEP 15, 2003 07:08 PM

A rather amusing film I saw the other week, but it had some interesting points.
Basic gist of the film. A fisherman's boat is destroyed by lightning, and the insurance company will not pay out as it is an Act of God. Fisherman thus feels that if it was an Act of God, then God Himself must be liable, and proceeds to sue Him through His representatives on Earth (the church)

Should insurance companies be able to still use such a clause which means they don't have to pay out in such freak occurences, despite the fact that freak occurences (aka accidents) are the entire reason for taking out insurance on an item...?

Spike

JonnyJonnyH

JonnyJonnyH

Seattle, WA
June 2003

SEP 15, 2003 07:38 PM

i think insurance is he biggest scam around. tongue

Rephrased

Rephrased

Portland, ME
June 2003

SEP 15, 2003 07:45 PM

If I may be the voice of reason here, what if God really didn't want that guy to have a boat? Who would the insurance company be to go against God by replacing this man's boat?

AntiHeRo13

AntiHeRo13

Hudson, WI
August 2003

SEP 15, 2003 08:50 PM

Thats funny. Suing a nonexistant entity.... biggrin

razor13

razor13

Los Angeles, CA
December 2002

SEP 15, 2003 08:57 PM

insurance is just a fancy, conneticuit way of saying extortion....

mentat

mentat

Durham, NC
July 2003

SEP 15, 2003 09:24 PM

I wonder if a plaintiff, who sues his insurance company for failure to pay a claim based on the Act of God clause, could force the insurance company to prove that there is a god and the god acted. Its sounds like a pretty tough defense...

Rephrased

Rephrased

Portland, ME
June 2003

SEP 16, 2003 04:04 AM

mentat said:
I wonder if a plaintiff, who sues his insurance company for failure to pay a claim based on the Act of God clause, could force the insurance company to prove that there is a god and the god acted. Its sounds like a pretty tough defense...



IK'm pretty sure the "act of God" clause is more specific than that. It gives a pretty clear definition of what will be considered acts of God. If I'm not wrong, they don't even call them acts of God anymore. There's some other term for it now, but I don't know what it is.

adjunct

adjunct

Philadelphia, PA
July 2002

SEP 16, 2003 01:20 PM

Massachusetts said:
IK'm pretty sure the "act of God" clause is more specific than that. It gives a pretty clear definition of what will be considered acts of God. If I'm not wrong, they don't even call them acts of God anymore. There's some other term for it now, but I don't know what it is.


"Force majeure"

I'm with Chris Rock on this: it should be called "In case shitÂ…", and if you don't use it, you get your money back.

pukedragon

pukedragon

North Versailles, PA
September 2003

SEP 16, 2003 06:11 PM

well, im gonna sue Santa for all that reindeer shit he left on my roof last year.......And im pretty sure the tooth fairy was taking pictures of me while i was sleeping.....

Sonntag

Sonntag

Atlanta, GA
August 2003

SEP 17, 2003 02:04 PM

The premise of that film is doubly funny: people rely on mystery cults as a form of psychological insurance anyway,

"If this world is shitty, but I remain virtuous according to the terms set forth by my relgious group, then I'm still ensured reward in the afterlife," reasoned the little deluded dupe.