Each company will work in a slightly different way but in principle, an insurance underwriter is looking at risk. My company advises on financial advice in the uk, the company we use asks questions about hazardous activities in recreational time, one of which they consider to be recreational diving (which I consider pretty safe personally). An underwriter is not necessarily a scuba diver, horse rider, rock climber, hanglider, or any other participant (expert or otherwise) in any such potentially hazardous activity. It would be stupid to expect someone with little idea about a sport or activity to make an important decission about whether or not to insure someone.
I am not rated as more risky as a scuba instructor, diving to max 40 metres and doing approx 100 dives per year. For the company we use, their major concerns are overhead environments, diving deeper than 40 metres and salvage / recovery.
I realise that it is an extreme example but looking at the initial comment about diving being safer than golf, you will not potentially have an out of air emergency playing 18 holes.
I am not rated as more risky as a scuba instructor, diving to max 40 metres and doing approx 100 dives per year. For the company we use, their major concerns are overhead environments, diving deeper than 40 metres and salvage / recovery.
I realise that it is an extreme example but looking at the initial comment about diving being safer than golf, you will not potentially have an out of air emergency playing 18 holes.
