Not exact matches
This changes the policy in such a way as to remove the list of covered perils and replace it with the words «We
insure against
risk of direct physical loss or damage...» followed by a few obvious exclusions such as
nuclear war.
If you like, you can even endorse your The Village At Fox Creek to cover open perils, which
insures against
risk of direct physical loss by any cause, subject to exclusions such as
nuclear hazards and intentional acts.
I would add that a commitment to increased
nuclear power would be a realistic way of
insuring future energy needs while hedging climate change
risks.
NUCLEAR RISK - Damage, deconstruction or loss to property is insured by — i) ionising radiation, or contamination by radioactivity from nuclear fuel or wastage from the combustion of nuclea
NUCLEAR RISK - Damage, deconstruction or loss to property is
insured by — i) ionising radiation, or contamination by radioactivity from
nuclear fuel or wastage from the combustion of nuclea
nuclear fuel or wastage from the combustion of
nuclearnuclear fuel.
This changes the policy in such a way as to remove the list of covered perils and replace it with the words «We
insure against
risk of direct physical loss or damage...» followed by a few obvious exclusions such as
nuclear war.
Insuring yourself against
nuclear risk is probably unnecessary.