After 911 the government has required insurance companies to write separate letters to policy holders for poolicies written after 1/1/03 if the basic policies have an exclusion for events of terrorism. Then, the government requires these companies to offer to remove the terrorism exclusion for a specific fee.
My employer purchases a stand-alone policy for Earthquake damage that renewed this month. Today, I received a letter advising me that the policy has a terrorism exclusion, but that we could purchase terrorism earthquake coverage for an additional 60 % or so more premium.
I emailed the company a note that included the following:
"I have difficulty envisioning a non-theatrical circumstance under which our earthquake coverage could be denied under a terrorism exception. (Gene Hackman playing Lex Luthor and detonating an underground nuclear device causing earthquakes severe enough to create Nevada ocean front property?).
Am I missing something here?"
Maybe the insurance companies fear that Saddam or the North Koreans will place nukes in our fault lines.
My employer purchases a stand-alone policy for Earthquake damage that renewed this month. Today, I received a letter advising me that the policy has a terrorism exclusion, but that we could purchase terrorism earthquake coverage for an additional 60 % or so more premium.
I emailed the company a note that included the following:
"I have difficulty envisioning a non-theatrical circumstance under which our earthquake coverage could be denied under a terrorism exception. (Gene Hackman playing Lex Luthor and detonating an underground nuclear device causing earthquakes severe enough to create Nevada ocean front property?).
Am I missing something here?"
Maybe the insurance companies fear that Saddam or the North Koreans will place nukes in our fault lines.
