Insured Your Stock — But Got a Refusal?
If you were among the foresighted sellers who insured your goods at the marketplace warehouse, your first reaction after the fire may have been relief. But when you attempt to collect on the policy, the illusion collapses: the insurer sends a dry refusal notice.
The stated reason is almost always the same: “Drone strike / military risk / act of terrorism / unlawful acts of third parties — this falls within a policy exclusion. No payment will be made.”
This is a standard delay tactic, not a lawful refusal. Here are the three vulnerabilities we attack to obtain the payment.
Vulnerability 1. The incident has not been formally classified
The insurer does not have the right to automatically classify a fire as a “military risk” or “terrorist act” before the official completion of an investigation and formal classification of the case by law enforcement authorities.
Until the investigation closes, the cause of the fire is legally undetermined. A refusal based on an unverified classification can be challenged as premature — and courts have accepted this argument.
Vulnerability 2. The exclusion clause conflicts with the Civil Code
Exclusion clauses in insurance policies are frequently worded vaguely or in a manner that conflicts with Articles 963–964 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Under the Civil Code, an insurer is released from payment only when:
- the policyholder acted with intent to cause the loss,
- the loss was caused by acts of war or civil war explicitly named in law.
If the policy exclusion is broader than the statute permits, the exclusion clause is void.
Vulnerability 3. The proximate cause of the loss is fire
Russian court practice focuses on the “proximate cause” of the loss. If the goods were destroyed by fire and heat — not by the direct physical impact of a projectile — courts frequently side with policyholders, classifying the event as a covered peril (fire) rather than an excluded military risk.
This is the core argument: burned goods are fire damage, not drone damage.
How We Pursue Insurance Claims
We analyse the policy and the Insurance Rules. We identify unbalanced clauses and provisions that conflict with Articles 963–964 of the Civil Code.
We commission an independent expert assessment establishing the actual cause of the property loss and the value of the damages — independent of the insurer’s version.
We file a pre-litigation claim and a court action. We claim not only the principal coverage amount, but also a penalty of up to 50%, statutory interest, and legal costs from the insurer for acting in bad faith.
Insurance companies are not motivated to pay tens of millions of roubles for burned warehouses — their legal departments will use every available argument. A lawyer’s task is to show the court that those arguments are legally unfounded.
Read Also
- The Maths of Wildberries ‘Benefits’: How Much You Need to Sell to Recover Burned Millions
- Court Filing Fees for Marketplace Claims: Three Legal Routes When You Cannot Afford 300,000 Roubles
Send us your insurance policy and rules — we will review them and explain how to obtain the payment. Contact us for a free initial assessment.