It sounds to me as if we have to insure ourselfs from ludacris, previous court decisions ?
I can see the point if our models are moving i.e. being used, and it hits someone causing them injury, but if it`s on display or on a stand at the side of the pond waiting to be used and somebody trips over it or pokes their eye out then it`s their fault ! they shoulden`t be anywhere near it.
Actually, it's not so much court decisions. The fact that you're insured means that there exists a simple mechanism for charging you and recovering some money. Lots of solicitors' firms currently exist on this system, acting either for or against such parties.
The 'debts' are sold on in amazing ways. 5 years ago someone cut across into my lane on a roundabout, and we bumped. We exchanged addresses and sorted out our dents off our insurance. I put down that it was the other parties' fault, but expected to hear nothing back, since there were no witnesses. A few weeks ago I got a letter from a solicitors firm - they had bought all the 'claimed other parties' fault' excess cases from my insurers, and wanted agreement to proceed with a letter-writing exercise to see if they could screw a bit more money out of a 5 year old case....
Compulsory insurance, as for motor vehicles, means there's always an opportunity for someone to make a bit of money. It is the existence of insurance which guarantees payout. People sue McDonalds, not because they're in the wrong, but because they're rich. Being insured makes you rich in the necessary way...
Incidentally, each time it rains, I do something incredibly dangerous. I take a big stick with a lot of 18" long spikes on it, arranged round in a circle, so I can't see where they all are at any one time, and then I hold it above my head so the ends of the spikes are at eye height for all the people passing me. Is it remarkably lax of me not to get insurance for this....?
