Residential terrorism cover

TheAble

Hi all,

I took out a buildings and contents policy a few months back but it's been niggling at me that it excludes cover for terrorism, war etc. These exclusions are I believe pretty standard across insurers. Does anyone know how to purchase terrorism cover? Are there any specialist insurers that cover this, as an add-on to an existing policy?

Many thanks for any assistance.

fromtheshires

All my insurance policies do not cover terrorism, war etc and I don't think many would without being super expensive (prohibitively so for an individual?) although I stand to be corrected.

I guess it's because of the cost of a terrorist offence or war damages and the sheer volume of claims they would have to pay out on.

Daniel54

War is always excluded and cannot be included ( it is viewed as a risk for the Government)

The standard UK residential policy covers terrorism,but not in respect of nuclear,chemical and biological

fromtheshires

Daniel54 wrote: »

The standard UK residential policy covers terrorism,but not in respect of nuclear,chemical and biological

Do you have any sources for this? I'm happy to be corrected but my policy with Aviva explicitly excludes all terrorism offences directly or indirectly.

FutureGirl

All our policies exclude any type of terrorism.

Aretnap

Direct Line exclude terrorism involving nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, but not terrorism in general. See page 37. https://www.directline.com/lib/pdf/dl-home-standard-policy-document.pdf Other insurers may vary.

Some events are simply too costly and destructive to insure against. A nuclear attack on a major city is probably one - it would cause more damage than any insurer would have the means to put right. Likewise a major war. By implication the government is probably the insurer of last resort for that kind of event. If there is no government afterwards, or if the new government is led by Vladimir Putin, then you're on your own.

Daniel54

fromtheshires wrote: »

Do you have any sources for this? I'm happy to be corrected but my policy with Aviva explicitly excludes all terrorism offences directly or indirectly.

Looking at the ABI site it appears I should have said that all UK personal lines policies can, rather than do,cover terrorism other than for nuclear,chemical,biological ( NBC)

Apologies for any confusion ,but I was coming at this from a reinsurance perspective where the cover has always been give to UK insurers.For anyone remotely interested this is in the last paragraph of clause NMA 2930b ,which was drafted in the aftermath of 9/11.

I checked my own Direct Line policy which excludes terrorism only in respect of NBC and it seems incorrectly put 2 and 2 together

System

A difficulty these days might be defing "terrorism" . A major bomb outrage perpetrated by an armed group, with responsibilty claimed by say ISIS, would be obvious. But what about a relatively minor act of arson or other damage caused by one individual who appeared to be claiming he was motivated by certain groups known be associated with terrorism?

The Terrorism Act now seems to justify action on things such as playground threats, local authority bin-snooping, etc. Does the insurer define what constitutes terrorism, and distinguish it from unatributable actions by criminals or individuals?

dacouch

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

A difficulty these days might be defing "terrorism" . A major bomb outrage perpetrated by an armed group, with responsibilty claimed by say ISIS, would be obvious. But what about a relatively minor act of arson or other damage caused by one individual who appeared to be claiming he was motivated by certain groups known be associated with terrorism?

The Terrorism Act now seems to justify action on things such as playground threats, local authority bin-snooping, etc. Does the insurer define what constitutes terrorism, and distinguish it from unatributable actions by criminals or individuals?

The last time I had training on Terrorism cover, there is a definite difference between your examples.

In the event of a terrorist attack for instance a bomb, the government declare whether it was an act by a recognised terrorist group eg IRA or ISIS etc. If it's not by a recognised group or a new terrorist group then the government do not declare it a terrorist attack and insurers do not regard it as a terrorist attack.

The last time I looked at a L&G Home Insurance policy (About 10 years ago) they did not have a Terrorism Exclusion and when I checked with them they had purposely left it out as they would pay such claims. They may have changed since then

System

dacouch wrote: »

. If it's not by a recognised group or a new terrorist group then the government do not declare it a terrorist attack and insurers do not regard it as a terrorist attack.

That's clear enough - thanks.

Is there a similar definition of riot, civil insurrection, etc? Something equivalent to reading the old Riot Act?

fromtheshires

Riot is covered under Section one of the Public Oder Act 1986, but its very rare the Police will call it a Riot (its more likely to be termed a large scale violent disorder) as then Police are liable for any damages as a result. I dont even think the london riots had many people charged with Riot - it was probably just a token one or two.