The conclusion that "insurance companies using algorithmic tools have failed Californians who lost their homes to fire by systematically undervaluing their properties" seems pretty dubious to me. Everyone is shooting the messenger by getting angry at the insurance companies when fire insurance isn't cheaper. Meanwhile many insurance companies are leaving California entirely.
It isn't the "evil algorithms" at fault here - it's the high risk of fire.
The reporting isn't about cost or availability of insurance; it is more about how insurance companies signficantly reduce payouts through a combination of secrecy, coercive practices against adjusters, paying less than standard rates, and not paying for portions of repairs that homeowners should reasonably expect to be covered. It also reported on areas beyond California.
Comments
The conclusion that "insurance companies using algorithmic tools have failed Californians who lost their homes to fire by systematically undervaluing their properties" seems pretty dubious to me. Everyone is shooting the messenger by getting angry at the insurance companies when fire insurance isn't cheaper. Meanwhile many insurance companies are leaving California entirely.
It isn't the "evil algorithms" at fault here - it's the high risk of fire.
The reporting isn't about cost or availability of insurance; it is more about how insurance companies signficantly reduce payouts through a combination of secrecy, coercive practices against adjusters, paying less than standard rates, and not paying for portions of repairs that homeowners should reasonably expect to be covered. It also reported on areas beyond California.
Did you read the series?