(Supreme Court of California) – Affirming the Court of Appeals judgment that a self storage company’s offer to assume the risk of loss for a fee, an alternative indemnity agreement meant to serve as a substitute for insurance, was not subject to regulation under the Insurance Code because the portion relating to self-service storage facilities acting as agents for insurers didn’t apply where the facility was not acting as an agent for an insurer and because the definition of insurance has long been held not to apply to indemnification agreements.
