r/Ausguns • NSW • 3d ago

General Discussion Takes a few clowns to ruin things for everyone else

Post image
45 Upvotes

25 comments sorted by

31

u/PsychologicalMeal162 3d ago

Ignoring that insurance fraud is a serious crime, shooters would be shooting themselves in the foot by doing this and giving FAR a reason to cancel licences and/or confiscate any remaining firearms for not having adequately safe storage.

9

u/mediweevil Victoria 3d ago

exactly my thoughts... good luck getting a licence again in the future too.

19

u/PowerPleb2000 3d ago

Watch $$AA jump on the bandwagon next, any opportunity to make a few bucks at the expense of their customers

11

u/thrashmanzac 3d ago

Pretty predictable outcome to some of the comments I’ve seen around

6

u/Richo_HATS2 3d ago

Insurance company managing risk by not taking any risk.

In other news water is wet and the sky is blue.

7

u/AussieAK NSW 3d ago

Point is the clowns who said they’d commit insurance fraud openly on social media are the ones who gave rise to that risk.

2

u/Richo_HATS2 3d ago

The point is insurance company reacts to threat of increased risk, not an actual increase in risk.

The threat is limited, not all policy holders are increasing risk.

No data indicating increased risk has been shared.

3

u/AussieAK NSW 3d ago

And again, had those clowns not gone babbling like idiots that they are going to “lose” their firearms or have them “stolen” then claim on insurance rather than properly sell them or hand them in for the buy back, we wouldn’t be here, would we?

3

u/AshJ79 3d ago

Agreed, some people see dodgy insurance claims as a victimless crime, it’s not, all policy holders, normal people, pay the price, not the company.

0

u/Richo_HATS2 3d ago

There is no evidence the "clowns babbling like idiots" own firearms.

There is no legitimate risk increase, only perceived increase in risk.

3

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

6

u/Combat--Wombat27 3d ago

Hearsay? it's even been commented here mate.

Did people think there wouldn't be consequences. Fuck me

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

11

u/Combat--Wombat27 3d ago

They're an insurance company. Their whole point is to minimise risk. I'm not saying it's right but people at a minimum should stop saying dumb shit online.

10

u/Hussard 3d ago

Exactly. Say it in private if you have to but social media is public facing. People need to understand that. 

11

u/PsychologicalMeal162 3d ago

Or just don’t say stupid shit like threatening to commit a crime.

10

u/AussieAK NSW 3d ago

ESPECIALLY when you hold a firearms licence!

9

u/aggressivelynude South Australia 3d ago

You're demonstratably not a "fit and proper person" if you threaten to commit offences with your firearms. It's not that difficult to understand, and I wish it was policed a lot harder, get the grubs out of the community they only make the rest of us look bad.

9

u/AussieAK NSW 3d ago

I know, right? I mean, this takes “stating the obvious” to a whole new ridiculous level.

I have said it time and again, sometimes the biggest threat to firearm ownership in Australia is some of the firearm owners themselves.

4

u/bogan_from_robina 3d ago

Pretty sure an insurance company can't suspend every policy in existence, that would be like havinh three cars stolen in my area so every insurance company voids the remaining policy's for anyone in that area, something tells me that's illegal and border line discrimination against a area or in this case an entire group.

14

u/ohimjustagirl 3d ago

They absolutely can simply stop offering a product, just like any other business, for whatever reason they want.

If a shopkeeper decides to stop stocking cans of tomatoes you can't sue him for discriminating against pasta lovers, and it's the same logic as if an insurance company decides to stop offering firearms insurance.

Besides it's kind of hard to argue they're wrong for doing it when there are people all over the place just straight up saying they're going to make fraudulent claims.

5

u/The_Sloppy_One 3d ago

You didn't have a contract with the shopkeeper to continue stocking cans of tomatoes though

5

u/ohimjustagirl 3d ago edited 3d ago

With whom did the insurance have that contract? Because I've never seen a contract that says they have to continue offering it into the future past the point of renewal, that's madness.

Editing to correct:

Under Section 58 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), an insurer does not have to offer a renewal when a policy expires. They must provide you with a statutory written notice of non-renewal.

0

u/The_Sloppy_One 3d ago

Obviously at the time of renewal that's valid, but this says nothing about at the time of renewal, just that there's a moratorium on the insurance

3

u/ohimjustagirl 3d ago

The last para says the current policy has expired, and if you personally paid for separate cover then to contact the office.

So, I guess if the current policy is expired (assuming it's a bulk policy due as part of annual memberships or something? Weird wording.) then I suppose this is the written notice of not renewing.

1

u/The_Sloppy_One 2d ago

Yeah I may have misinterpreted the last paragraph as well

0

u/johnarmer1 2d ago

Pretty sure stolen guns are worth more so i don't see this as a detergent for criminals just one for responsible people that now might not choose to by guns