The article, "Reading the storm" (5 December, Insurance Times), was most informative, but I was particularly interested to read that "each insurer has its own interpretation" of storm. For 25 years we have been trying to filter out "inappropriate" claims, before insurers even see them, and our biggest FAQ in that context is: "What is a storm?"

My standard reply is: "Wind of exceptional ferocity, regardless of whether or not accompanied by precipitation in any form."

Now, it seems, I need to know what wind speed each insurer reckons constitutes a storm.

Since there is now known to be a definable differentiation between insurers on what all of their policies state simplistically as "storm", is it not right for each of them to publish its definition?

How can I maintain our GISC compliance if I cannot tell my clients at what speed the wind must blow for their claim to be paid?

How can I justify our existence to customers with different insurers, when they live in adjacent houses and suffer the fate you outline?

If GISC regulation doesn't impose this fairness to customers on insurers and their brokers, perhaps the FSA will.

Robert Greenman
Greenman Insurance Brokers

Letters intended for publication should be sent to: Insurance Times, 30 Cannon Street, London EC4M 6YJ emailed to , or faxed to 020 7618 3499