© 2025 News On The Block. All rights reserved.
News on the Block is a trading name of Premier Property Media Ltd.
Until The 1990’S insurance policies included damage by terrorism. Following incidents in London, insurers were no longer able to purchase the reinsurance cover they needed to protect themselves against potentially catastrophic losses so were threatening to exclude these risks completely. The Government stepped in to provide the insurers with the reinsurance cover needed to enable them to continue to provide the cover but it now had to be bought as a separate policy.
MISCONCEPTION 1:
Why don’t the insurers cover terrorism as standard? Although you are insuring a residential property most insurers consider RMCs to be a commercial client, so do not provide terrorism cover automatically. Terrorism cover will be quoted separately.
MISCONCEPTION 2:
Is it your choice whether to insure? The terms of the lease or mortgage agreement may specifically state the minimum insurance required. Older agreements may pre-date the change in the terrorism rules. Therefore when stating “full insurance” the agreement would have expected this to include terrorism. Newer agreements may be more specific. Remember to check your lease - if you are obliged to insure and fail to do so, not only will the loss not be insured but the directors could be held personally responsible for the loss.
MISCONCEPTION 3:
You may have considered the risk and chose not to insure as you are not in a target area – e.g. Government premises, or inner cities. Residential areas are not normally targets. Even if not in an obvious target area, where the bomb is being assembled, what route it will be transported through – these activities often take place in low profile areas and the explosion could be unplanned.
MISCONCEPTION 4:
What is an act of terrorism? Most people’s thoughts immediately focus on what is in the news and equate terrorism with political acts linked to overseas events. The policy definition of terrorism is broad; this can include other groups with agendas relating to environmental issues or animal rights. People whose aims you may support but methods you abhor. These activities may be planned or happen in residential areas – could one of your residents be a participant or a target – e.g. a CEO of a biotech company or a politician with extremist’s views.
Assessing the full extent of the risk is small but is it a risk worth taking by failing to insure?