When Lloyd’s provided updated guidance and exclusions for nation-state cyber attacks, some industry players and news outlets concluded the organization intended to jettison all such coverage.
Not so, Lloyd’s said earlier this year, asserting it wanted to ensure such coverage was distinguished from general cyber insurance and its risk was properly priced. But customers continue to be confused, according the report below
“‘If Lloyd’s has phrased it as Lloyd’s affirmatively covering cyber war, we wouldn’t be having this discussion,’ Tom Draper, head of UK insurance at cyber underwriting agency Coalition Inc., said in an interview. ‘But because it’s been phrased as an exclusion, everyone’s [saying], ‘You’re pulling cover back.’ The counterargument would be that Lloyd’s is now providing cover that may never have been there or that would have required a court case to affirm, Draper said.”
Well, we’ll wait and see if Lloyd’s steps up in a meaningful way to provide coverage for these risks, especially absent government financial backstops.
Meantime, as the report below discusses, other carriers are struggling to come up with good strategies and clarify their policies.
Lloyd’s of London’s use of new language around cover for war and severe state-sponsored attacks has made the coverage more difficult to understand for customers, brokers said.
Source: Battle over cyber war insurance exclusions making buyers question value of cover