The last part is very interesting in the context of the just stop oil vandalism.
Personally I wouldn’t have made the connection between war risks and vandalism in a country not at war.
If my aircraft (if I had one or my car) was vandalised in the UK and the insurance refused to pay out citing war risks, I’d be rather upset.
Maybe that is made clear to people buying the policy, in which case it’s fair game.
Yeah – got to read the small print 
This is not entirely uncommon, especially in the Rotax world where the engines can be fairly easily “recycled” into the homebuilding scene. Maybe not in the UK but Italy was said to be a popular destination for these.
Reading Bob’s very clear exposition I went to my Visicover policy and found that the link between war risks and vandalism is indeed spelled out in no uncertain terms. I had ticked the war risks box!
Curious, I tried removing it. The difference was very minor. So if you are based in Central UK, ‘war risk’ is apparently a very small thing indeed. Let’s hope they are right, Mr Putin!
On the other hand, if you want a cheap paint job, I can think of a few places where just stop oil could work unmolested for days. It’d be better to tape up the windows first, though.
Aveling wrote:
Let’s hope they are right, Mr Putin!
Again, read the small print !!!
What is not covered is (at least in my insurance):
war (whether there be a declaration of war or not) between any of the following States: the United Kingdom,
the United States of America, France, the Russian Federation, the People’s Republic of China
I have no relationship with Visicover (other than as customer) but there on-line help says:
Hull War & Allied Perils
Covers loss or damage to the aircraft arising from war, riot, hijacking and vandalism. These perils are specifically excluded from the standard Aircraft Loss or Damage cover.
See the Policy Booklet for full cover details
The Policy Booklet says:
3.1 What is covered under this Section
3.1.1 War, hi-jacking and other perils coverage
The Insurer will pay for physical loss of or damage to the Aircraft insured under Section 1 (Aircraft Loss or
Damage) against claims otherwise excluded from that Section as caused by
(a) War, invasion, acts of foreign enemies, hostilities (whether war be declared or not), civil war, rebellion,
revolution, insurrection, martial law, military or usurped power or attempts at usurpation of power.
(b) Strikes, riots, civil commotions or labour disturbances.
(c) Any act of one or more persons, whether or not agents of a sovereign power, for political or terrorist purposes
and whether the loss or damage resulting therefrom is accidental or intentional.
(d) Any malicious act or act of sabotage.
(e) Confiscation, nationalisation, seizure, restraint, detention, appropriation, requisition for title or use by or under
the order of any government (whether civil, military or de facto) or public or local authority.
(f) Hi-jacking or any unlawful seizure or wrongful exercise of control of the Aircraft or crew in Flight (including
any attempt at such seizure or control) made by any person or persons on board the Aircraft acting without
the consent of the Policyholder
So no tricky exclusions there (but I’m no lawyer). I fully endorse your caution over this, as one of the many who were taken in over the ‘combined liability’ scam a few years back with other aviation insurers. But in the is case, I’m happy about my insurance in the event of Putin nuking the UK.
You have to read also the next chapter(s). Things that are not covered.
Okay, okay, I’m on shaky ground if the plane gets frazzled by a nuclear bomb. But I’m paying for vandalism cover and I expect to get that. Anyway, I’ve still got a copy of that strongly worded letter that I wrote to the directors of the White Star line….
