Insurance anomaly

Now why should two correspondents, one of them Anton Felice, for the Malta Insurance Association (October 20), refer to the editorial of October 12 and only to the reference in it to the lightning bolt damage, obviously given as an example, though...

Now why should two correspondents, one of them Anton Felice, for the Malta Insurance Association (October 20), refer to the editorial of October 12 and only to the reference in it to the lightning bolt damage, obviously given as an example, though improbable to occur?

The two correspondents both do not refer to the very real shameful situation of damage caused to parked cars by fire breaking out in another car which is insured for fire and theft and in which the other car owners are not compensated for the damage they suffer. Only the owner of the car causing the damage gets compensation. How is that for justice - Roman or otherwise?

Dr Felice should tell us his and his association's thoughts on that. I wonder if, by referring to the damage caused by lightning, he is trying to defend MPs - to whom the editorial made a link in its final paragraph - as a thank you to Parliament for standing up so loyally for the moneyed insurers, at the cost of the consumer.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.