Insurance does cover storm and flood damage, says GasanMamo’s Francis Valletta after Storm Harry

In the aftermath of Storm Harry, as business owners assessed the damage caused by heavy rain, flooding, strong winds and hail, a familiar misconception resurfaced: The belief that insurance policies do not cover what many refer to as “acts of God”.

Francis Valletta, General Manager of the Motor Insurance Division at GasanMamo Insurance and a Visiting Assistant Lecturer at the Department of Insurance within the Faculty of Economics, Management and Accountancy (FEMA), took to LinkedIn to address what he described as a long-standing and misunderstood idea that continues to influence how people perceive insurance cover.

“Many people still think insurance doesn’t cover storm, flood, wind, or hail damage because of the long-standing and misunderstood idea of ‘acts of God.’ They are of course, wrong,” he wrote.

Mr Valletta explained that the term “act of God” has its roots in legal language rather than in insurance practice. Historically, it has been used in contracts and in law to describe events that are beyond human control. However, he stressed that this concept does not automatically translate into exclusions under insurance policies.

“‘Act of God’ sounds final and absolute, so people assume it means that since no one is responsible nothing is covered. Its source is legal language, not insurance,” he said, adding that insurance policies are specifically designed to cover many natural events, provided they are listed as insured perils – which, in most cases, they are.

He also highlighted another common source of confusion: the difference between liability cover and damage cover.

“People also confuse liability cover with damage cover. An ‘act of God’ may be used as a defence when denying liability, but insurance cover for damage isn’t about blame, it’s about whether the peril is insured or not,” Mr Valletta noted, emphasising that these are “two different things, but they often get mixed up.”

Referring to historical practices in the local market, Mr Valletta acknowledged that some comprehensive motor policies in the past did exclude certain risks, such as flood, riot and strike, from standard cover, requiring policyholders to pay an additional premium to include them. However, he pointed out that this is no longer reflective of the current situation.

“Most Maltese insurers however started including these risks with standard cover more than 25 years ago, but the misconception still remains,” he said.

His comments come at a time when several business owners across Malta and Gozo are dealing with storm-related damage and uncertainty about what their policies cover.

Take a look here on the damage the storn had brought to Marsaskala’s business owners along the promenade: