Insurance association head explains when drone and missile coverage stops working
Jānis Abāšins, head of the Latvian Insurers Association, says new insurance coverage for damage from drones or stray missiles stops applying once Latvia itself becomes party to a war. The add-on only covers cases where Latvia is not involved in the conflict.
Several insurers in Latvia have recently begun offering additional coverage for damage caused by drones or stray missiles. However, such a policy does not mean full protection against all consequences of war, explained Jānis Abāšins, president of the Latvian Insurers Association and head of the Motor Insurers' Bureau of Latvia, in an interview on TV24's programme "Preses klubs."
War remains an exclusion
Abāšins noted that war and war-like actions have traditionally been among the standard exclusions in insurance. That is why the new add-on coverage applies only to situations where Latvia itself is not engaged in hostilities — for example, if a drone belonging to another state, or a stray missile, enters Latvian territory and causes property damage. In such cases, losses may in certain instances be compensated.
However, once Latvia itself becomes involved in a war, this additional coverage ceases to apply. "This is insurance that is valid right now, while Latvia is not at war with anyone," Abāšins emphasized.
Why five major powers are named in policies
Abāšins also explained why insurance terms specifically mention a group of five major powers. Should any of these countries become engaged in warfare, the potential losses would be so massive that no single insurer, nor the insurance market as a whole, could cover them.
For this reason, the currently offered add-on should not be seen as general insurance against the consequences of war. It covers a specific, limited risk — such as a foreign-owned drone or missile entering Latvian territory — while Latvia itself remains uninvolved in the conflict.
Abāšins suggested that some of the confusion surrounding this type of insurance stems from clients not carefully reading all policy terms, or insurers failing to explain them clearly enough.
