A new estimate that surpasses the previous one. The cost of the damage caused during the series of riots triggered by the death of young Nahel on June 27 should be 650 million euros for insurers. This new figure, communicated on Tuesday July 11 by the professional federation of insurers, represents more than double the 280 million euros anticipated last week.
Nine tenths “of the cost of this urban violence concerns the 3,900 property of professionals and local communities affected”, said the president of France insurers Florence Lustman, quoted in a press release. The rest mainly concerns damage suffered by individuals for their personal vehicles. The federation counts 11,300 declarations of claims linked to the violence which followed the death of Nahel, 17, killed on June 27 during a road check in Nanterre. In detail, claims on professional property represent 55% of the 650 million euros mentioned, and those on the property of local authorities 35%, specifies France insurers.
As of July 1, the Minister of the Economy Bruno Le Maire had asked insurers to extend the declaration deadlines, reduce deductibles and quickly compensate professionals who were victims of the riots, towards whom the banks were also called upon to show of understanding.
The professional federation had invited its members three days later to “reduce” the deductibles for the “small independent traders hardest hit” by the urban violence. It was heard by certain mutualists such as Covea (MMA, MAAF and GMF brands), Macif, but also the bank insurers BPCE, Crédit Agricole or Crédit Mutuel Alliance Fédérale (which brings together 14 of the 18 federations of the mutualist group as well as CIC), which have announced measures for the victims.
“The nature of the claims related to the violence of recent days is therefore very different from what our country experienced in 2005”, adds Florence Lustman. At the time, damage and fire to vehicles represented more than 80% of claims for a total cost of 204 million euros.
It remains to be seen whether insurers will react in the same way as before. The following year, a standoff pitted them against the government over the question of whether the state was responsible for the urban violence.
In 2006, the mutual insurance of local authorities (SMACL), on the front line this year, had for example initiated “contentious proceedings” against the State for lack of an amicable agreement on compensation for urban violence in November 2005. .
