Originally Posted by polyspheric
Racing deaths are not suicide, and the policy in question is not his life insurance - it's the cost to the track and other drivers.
Your life insurance may cover you for a racing death - and that has the following effect on other participants: none whatever.

"No suicide for 2 years" was the rule in life insurance policies for over 100 years. You agreed to it when you paid the premium; no, you can't cross it out and initial it. No one who killed himself with wet ink on the new policy received money.
My source: Metropolitan Life Insurance Company employed my grandfather, my father, and me beginning around 1930. I was employed as a Senior Court Clerk by the Supreme Court of New York County, Civil Term, after that.


Tour statements seem to be in conflict:

"W/r/t your life insurance finds out your safety equipment was in violation of posted rules...and they pin loss of life on it

This is quite possible, "contributory negligence" is claimed to reduce the award value."

This last posting of yours only restates what I mentioned a number of replies ago for the discerning reader..

Let me recap succinctly:
1. Accidents/deaths at the track effect all racers, partly thru increased insurance costs of the operators.
2. life insurance benefit award for at the track incidents are not directly effected negatively in anyway by "contributory negligence" pf the deceased.
3. Its hard to justify "contributory negligence" as a life insurance benefit reduction factor, IF for example say almost universally ,suicide is no a reduction factor, as I already clearly noted, but there are often certain restrictions regarding suicide on life insurance ( 2 yr initial exclusion being the most common).
4. Life Insurance is a contract, subject to its terms, that both parties agree to in advance.

Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.