Re: insurance, liability, etc.

["Robin Copini" <rcopini-at-merlin-dot-net.au> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)]

Hi all, some comments on Jim's statements below:




>
>
> If you DO have a family, or assets, etc. the situation is a bit more
> tricky.  Say you own a house with a mortgage.. Most likely, you are
> carrying some sort of homeowner's policy, which in turn covers some amount
> of personal liability coverage. You can also buy personal liability
> umbrella coverage.  Hopefully, the policy doesn't specifically exclude
> liability for loss by tesla coiling.
>

Does USA have regs concerning 'house electrical systems', i.e. are you
permitted to modify house wiring without having electrical trade licensing?
Here in OZ, although we can buy all the stuff we're not permitted to install
anything without the correct tradesman performing the job. i.e. If these regs
apply in USA, the 'low' side of your coil would have to conform to the same
standards.

>
> Now you are in the same situation as if your hobby was shooting guns, using
> a chainsaw, etc.  and you decided to give a demonstration of your skills
> and abilities (say, by juggling those chainsaws at the park). Assuming you
> acted responsibly (note: much time has been spent in court by lots of
> people to argue about what "responsible" means in a particular
> situation..), but something bad happened (e.g. a large bird grabbed the
> chain saw at the apex of its flight, carried it over the crowd and dropped
> it on someone, cutting them), you'd probably be covered.

This is where it gets interesting, what events can you predict 'could' happen,
and which ones fall into the category of 'acts of god'? My approach would be to
detail as many possibilities as one could reasonably expect, given that many
would come under the same 'heading' i.e. pacemakers/auto insulin pumps, metal
pins in limbs, cochlear implants, watches, cameras etc etc and detail the
approach taken to minimise the risk in each situation, i.e. faraday cage/
physical seperation etc and use this as a reference when dealing with
officials. It would show a deliberate attempt on your part to address risk.

>
>
> Or for another example, say you're coiling in the garage, and it starts a
> fire, and burns your house down.  Is this particularly different from
> having an accident when refinishing a lacquered chair and having the
> solvent ignite? Not really, assuming you weren't being totally negligent
> (documentation being the key here.... not that insurance companies are
> snaky or anything, it's just that they are in business to maximize
> shareholder value, which means avoiding paying as much as they can).
>

This comes under my comments above, If your coil continually arcs to a
supporting timber in the basement, and subsequently your house burns down, it
could be said that you should have had an expectation of the 'possibility' that
this could occur, and taken steps to avoid risk, i.e. place an intercepting
ground rod in the way, fire extinguishers present etc. If, however, you have
'enough' seperation based on previous operation of the coil and the
'act-of-god' 20 footer comes out of your 15/60 NST powered unit and hits the
tin of solvent on the other side of the shed, you could be excused for not
reasonably expecting this situation.

>
> The key here will probably be the "hobby" nature of your activity... if
> you're getting paid to do it (other than reimbursing expenses), it gets
> perilously close to what the insurance company might want to consider a
> "business", and therefore not covered.  The other key will be the technical
> legality of what you are doing.  If you destroy the house down because the
> nitrating process runs away when making nitroglycerin, your insurance
> company is going to turn you down, because making explosives in a residence
> is illegal.  For TC's I would imagine that you would want to make sure that
> your wiring is "up to code", at least to the primary disconnect, etc.
>

All true, although 'hobby' and 'business' can cross in some cases, usually
dependant on % of income derived.

The whole issue comes down to risk management, Events like 13M at Anaheim would
have had to have been planned like a military operation. using a similar
approach as I detailed above to determine risks and strategies to minimise
them, thus satisfying authorities that all reasonable attempts have ben made to
address public safety. I was recently asked to run my coil at a rave party
where some 2000 people would have been present, I would have loved to have done
this but declined as the location would have prevented me from being able to
address all the risk issues I felt were relevant - If you're not sure, then
don't do it. Any negative publicity may have ramifications for all of us.

My 5cents worth

Robin Copini, South Australia.