Property insurance historically has some of the best consumer protections, its one of the oldest "private subscriptions" that fills a critical need. But new technology can easily disrupt a balance of power set decades ago.
The issue California faces isn't a technical one. Its a social/ behavior issue. Californians will need to change their behavior with regards to how they manage their personal property or the risk will continue to be too high for insurance companies to bear. These properties aren't struggling to get insurance because suddenly we have aerial imagery; they are struggling because the data regarding wildfire risk has become impeccably clear.
Individual actions can make an impact to their individual and community wildfire risk, but fundamentally wildfire risk is a network phenomena. It has to happen at scale. If a homeowner isn't willing to deal with debris piles on their property they are putting themselves and their community at risk. Should they get insurance?
But I can tell you this right now, with what I saw in the video he won't pass. He's storing combustibles too close to the structure. It puts him at significant risk.
At my company we see customer service as the top priority and try to partner with homeowners to both understand their risk and take action. This is why we focus our reporting so much on education around the issue and communication about what matters for risk.
Ultimately however, the onus is on the homeowner to take action. It's no one's responsibility but theirs to understand and mitigate their risk. I think many home owners are naive as to how high their risk really is. Look at the reaction to Oregon's recent risk maps. The maps were accurate, and the public panicked. Now they are wordsmithing the science to down play the risk. Rearranging the deck chairs does nothing about the underlying hazard.
Link to the Oregon story: https://katu.com/news/local/oregon-lawmakers-insurance-commi...