In Washington Internat. Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1998) 62 Cal. App. 4th 981, a subcontractor brought an action against the surety on a public works payment bond to recover money the prime contractor did not pay to the subcontractor. [A payment bond is "a bond with good and sufficient sureties that is conditioned for the payment in full of the claims of all claimants . . . ." (Civ. Code, 3096.] The subcontractor's complaint included a request for relief under Public Contract Code section 10262.5 which, like Business and Professions Code section 7108.5, imposes a 2 percent per month penalty for a prime contractor's failure to make timely payment to a subcontractor. The surety moved to strike the portion of the complaint that requested payment of the 2 percent monthly interest penalty. The trial court denied the surety's motion and the payment bond surety filed a petition for writ of mandate. ( Washington Internat. Ins. Co., supra, 62 Cal. App. 4th at pp. 983-985.) The Court held a public works payment bond, unlike a mechanic's lien, exists to secure payment to the claimant of the amount due from the principal, and the interest penalty is clearly a part of that claim. ( Washington Internat. Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, supra, 62 Cal. App. 4th at pp. 986-989.) The Court further held that requiring the surety to pay the statutory penalty does not violate public policy. ( Id. at p. 989.) Insurance Code section 533 provides, in relevant part, "an insurer is not liable for a loss caused by the wilful act of the insured" and it embodies the public policy against indemnity coverage for intentional torts. ( Washington Internat. Ins. Co., supra, at p. 989.) However, a surety bond and a liability insurance policy are conceptually and legally distinct. (Ibid.) An insurer undertakes to indemnify another against loss, damage, or liability arising from an unknown or contingent event, whereas a surety promises to answer for the debt, default, or miscarriage of another. (Ibid.) The surety relationship is a tripartite one, in which the third party (the obligee, or, here, the subcontractor), rather than the principal (here, the general contractor), is protected by the surety's promise to pay if the principal does not, in exchange for which promise the principal pays the premium for the bond. (Ibid.) While an insurer has no right of subrogation against its insured, a surety has every right to reimbursement from its principal. (Ibid.) "In other words, under a surety bond, the principal is not indemnified; the surety can sue the principal for any sums it must pay out to the obligee, and the public policy embodied in Insurance Code section 533 is in no way offended." (Ibid.)