Tom Hiddleston and Taylor Swift’s romance is hot news in China, where online stores have been offering ‘break-up insurance'.
People, especially Hiddleston’s adoring female fans, have been paying up to 400 yuan, about £41, to predict how long the relationship will last. They hoped to double or even triple their cash.
Now Chinese authorities have ordered the stores to withdraw the schemes sharpish. Individuals can’t sell insurance in China, and in any case this is really betting - something also outlawed unless sanctioned by the state.
But then isn’t all insurance really betting, a bet against yourself that you will lose, that your house will burn down, your dog will need expensive surgery, that you will die prematurely?
Insurance is often money down the drain for those with means. Instead of paying premiums, they could self-insure by relying on savings. But even the comfortably-off need cover against major disasters from which they would not recover financially. And for those living hand to mouth, insurance can remove the sting from life’s less painful slings and arrows, such as totalling a car.
Like their policyholders, insurers are also taking a gamble - that you will not suffer any losses. Your premiums in part reflect their assessment of your risk. But, just as bookmakers load the odds in their favour, the dice is weighted against policyholders.
While people who work for insurance companies, at all levels, are usually decent, honourable folk, their companies are there to make money - from you. It can be in insurers’ short-term interests that you remain in the dark about what you are buying.
Policy terms and conditions can be as long as a short novel and are usually couched in legalese. It is not reasonable to expect people to plough through them. The longer and more complicated documents are, the less chance they will be read or understood. And of course ambiguity is a Godsend when it comes to wriggling out of a claim.
Most US states have laws imposing minimum plain-English requirements on insurance documents. We should do the same here. Meanwhile, insurers who really want to treat their customers ethically - a great way to steal a march on competitors - would voluntarily make sure their terms are clear.
Admittedly, insurance can be complicated and occasionally technical terms have to be used to convey precise meaning. Also, insurers have compliance officers and lawyers on their back. But these excuses largely don’t wash. There are plenty of writers who could turn specialised descriptions into legally accurate laypersons’ language.
And explaining jargon is not enough. Insurers who cared would ditch phrases which leave lingering misleading impressions such as 'all risks' property insurance which does not cover all risks, and 'fully comprehensive' car insurance which is not fully comprehensive.
An ethical insurer would also make sure lists of what is covered would always be longer than what isn’t. Exclusions would be kept to a minimum. Remaining ones should be highlighted, rather than buried in small print. After all, if insurers believe their policies offer value for money, they should not be ashamed to shout from the rooftops what is and isn’t covered.
As it is, the onus is on us to beware. Some types of insurance are less consumer-friendly than others. Loopholes litter mobile phone policies. And pet insurance is so full of get-out clauses that, according to a recent report by comparison website money.co.uk, four in ten claims are rejected. This compares badly with the about one in eight travel claims and one in five home insurance claims turned down.
How dreadful that people who think they are doing the best for their animal may be buying, at great expense, a false sense of security. And how heartbreaking if they cannot afford care out of their own pocket.
Of course what pet insurers are keen to publicise are the feel-good stories. Remember that bleak four out of ten statistic when you see a glorious picture of a happy golden retriever who has had life-saving surgery paid for by an insurer.
Other insurers, as recently highlighted by Spectator Money, profit from inertia by charging over the odds at renewal. Some offer new customers cheaper premiums. At particular risk are health policyholders who have had serious illnesses and worry that another insurer will not take them on.
And lots of us swell insurers' profits by not claiming because firms don’t give indications of how much our future premiums will rise if we do. Some of us even insure our no-claims protection, mistakenly believing it will stop our premiums rising.
In the absence of fiercer consumer protection, we have to get more hard-headed. Ask questions. Demand understandable answers. If you don’t get them go elsewhere.
Insurance can protect you, but only if you first protect yourself.
Lynne Bateson is a freelance writer and journalist. She was a national newspaper financial editor and consumer columnist.