The WTC complex was owned by a group of investors represented by real estate mogul Larry Silverstein. He signed a 99-year lease on July 24, 2001. . The group didn't actually obtain a "policy" of insurance, but instead they were issued two different "binders", which are documents giving them temporary coverage for the period until the full policy(s) on WTC was issued, but don't contain the full terms and conditions details of a policy. So it was likely the biggest single insurance claim ever, but with policy terms that weren't written out and were mostly implied in the binder contract. When the towers fell a couple of months later, that insurance policy became the focus of a years-long legal proceeding.
It's not uncommon for high profile commercial properties to have terrorism coverage. The WTC policy did. Especially given the 1993 terrorism of the same building complex. The main question here is whether the loss was ONE event or TWO. Since there were two different groups of insurers that participated in two different binders, the big question was ONE or TWO occurrences. In the lawsuits, juries found that under one binder, led by Swiss Re, the attacks were a single occurrence, but under the other binder, led by Travelers, they found it was two occurrences. Ultimately, the insurance payout for the WTC was $4.6 billion - which took until 2007 to sort out.
From what little I know, virtually all of the policy award money went into the rebuilding of the WTC complex and "Freedom Tower" 1 WTC.
The WTC complex was owned by a group of investors represented by real estate mogul Larry Silverstein. He signed a 99-year lease on July 24, 2001. . The group didn't actually obtain a "policy" of insurance, but instead they were issued two different "binders", which are documents giving them temporary coverage for the period until the full policy(s) on WTC was issued, but don't contain the full terms and conditions details of a policy. So it was likely the biggest single insurance claim ever, but with policy terms that weren't written out and were mostly implied in the binder contract. When the towers fell a couple of months later, that insurance policy became the focus of a years-long legal proceeding.
It's not uncommon for high profile commercial properties to have terrorism coverage. The WTC policy did. Especially given the 1993 terrorism of the same building complex. The main question here is whether the loss was ONE event or TWO. Since there were two different groups of insurers that participated in two different binders, the big question was ONE or TWO occurrences. In the lawsuits, juries found that under one binder, led by Swiss Re, the attacks were a single occurrence, but under the other binder, led by Travelers, they found it was two occurrences. Ultimately, the insurance payout for the WTC was $4.6 billion - which took until 2007 to sort out.
From what little I know, virtually all of the policy award money went into the rebuilding of the WTC complex and "Freedom Tower" 1 WTC.