Agreed. This is why giant, national insurance is a bad idea to begin. The idea is nice: everyone pays a little so that unfortunate individuals don't lose everything. The problem is that the company that manages it has an intrinsic conflict of interest in not paying the unfortunate. It is unavoidable. Game theory will show that the optimal policy is to pay out as little as is legally required to customers.

The solution is to gamify the system to optimize mitigating and distributing risk from individuals to their neighbors who desire their good. This is not to make professional insurance customers (sue-happy vultures, etc.) or large companies that love to line their pockets and make excuses. This is to keep people from losing their shirts when they get into a fender-bender and need some chiropractic care, or help replace a vehicle after a freak fire in their truck cab.

This is already done for health in cost-sharing plans. (We use Samaritan, and I know there's a Bitcoin-backed/-integrated one out there, too.)