In a recent article which was published by byteclay.com by this writer it was stated that Insurance Companies are seriously considering the possibility of excluding coverage for losses that are in any way related to a Smart Meter malfunction.
I recommend a letter posted on the net by Sharon Noble of British Columbia which pointed out the existence of this type of exclusion; please see: https://smartmeternewsupdates.wordpress.com.
Lloyds of London has already excluded from coverage any liability for claims related to smart meters and other radiation producing devices. The memo from Lloyds regarding this decision is summed up in the following exclusion that became effective on February 28, 2015. It states:
Lloyds of London will not cover any liability arising from claims
“Directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or contributed to by electromagnetic fields, electromagnetic radiation, electromagnetism, radio waves or noise.” (Exclusion 32)
Exclusion 32 itself reads,
“We will not
a) make any payment on your behalf for any claim, or
b) incur any costs and expenses, or
c) reimburse you for any loss, damage, legal expenses, fees or costs sustained by you, or
d) pay any medical expenses:
directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or contributed to by electromagnetic fields, electromagnetic radiation, electromagnetism, radio waves or noise.”
An exclusion such as this would take into account microwave radiation and electromagnetic radiation emitted from Smart Meters (AMR, AMI, PLC), from Home Area Network devices and appliances (including AC and thermostats), from Wi-Fi transmitters, from wireless devices in schools, offices, and homes, and from wireless sensors and wireless-connected fire alarms.
The significance of this action on the part of Lloyds of London cannot be under estimated due to the importance of Lloyds in the world insurance economy as a reinsurance carrier. The reinsurance companies in this world make their profits by carrying a percentage of the risk of any building or business. For instance if a large business would require $10,000,000 in liability coverage, the insurance company trying to write that business may look to Lloyds to see if they could take 10% of the risk, or 10% of the $10,000,000 total.
Now if Lloyds completes their risk analysis and determines that smart meters are in abundance at the building, they will most likely insist on enforcing the terms of the Exclusion 32 which may in turn result in a huge premium in order for their reinsurance coverage to be provided creating a situation in which the building could not be insured.
In addition to the decision of Lloyds of London, Swiss Reinsurance, another world wide competitor in the reinsurance market issued the following alert:
“Unforeseen consequences of electromagnetic fields” could lead to a raft of claims and significant product liability losses in the next 10 years.
In its Swiss Re SONAR Emerging Risks report, 2013, which covers risks that could “impact the insurance industry in the future”, the company categories the impact of health claims related to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) as ‘high’. It acknowledges recent reports of court’s ruling in favor of claimants who have experienced health damage from mobile phones, and also says that anxiety over risks related to EMFs is “on the rise”.
– See more at: http://stopsmartmeters.org.uk/insurance-firm-swiss-re-warns-of-large-losses-from-unforeseen-health-claims-due-to-wireless-technologies/#sthash.E7xLAv99.dpuf.
I can tell you this, with reinsurance carriers taking the stand they have regarding liability claims, the same type of exclusion is on the horizon for property related losses.