Leaseholder paying building insurance

justin75

Hi all, i have just read on the main website that leaseholders and renters do not pay for building insurance and that the freeholder is responsible.

I live in a 1 bed that i have bought 'leasehold' and have been paying building insurance for the last 5 years.

What are my rights in potentially claiming any of this back and refusing to pay at the next renewal? Is this a fast and hard rule or is it possible there could be a clause in my contract saying i am responsible?

Any info would be gratefully received,

Many thanks

rs65

I think the article is wrong.

Dangermac

justin75 wrote: »

Hi all, i have just read on the main website that leaseholders and renters do not pay for building insurance and that the freeholder is responsible.

I live in a 1 bed that i have bought 'leasehold' and have been paying building insurance for the last 5 years.

What are my rights in potentially claiming any of this back and refusing to pay at the next renewal? Is this a fast and hard rule or is it possible there could be a clause in my contract saying i am responsible?

Any info would be gratefully received,

Many thanks

- The freeholder needs to insure the building
- There will be a premium to be paid for insuring the building
- The freeholder will pass this cost on to the leaseholder/renter (either seperately - or as part of a management charge / rent)
- One way or another, you will be paying the cost of this.

What does your lease / rental agreement say?

DM

bryanb

As I understand things, you must have an insurable interest in something before you can insure it. The freeholder has such an interest, the leaseholder does not. However as said you will pay one way or another. The question is whether the insurance company would pay out to you.
Are you the policyholder?

bryanb

rs65 wrote: »

I think the article is wrong.

I think you are wrong.

Dangermac

bryanb wrote: »

As I understand things, you must have an insurable interest in something before you can insure it. The freeholder has such an interest, the leaseholder does not. However as said you will pay one way or another. The question is whether the insurance company would pay out to you.
Are you the policyholder?

The policy will normally pay out to the freeholder.

However, the freeholder will look to recover the cost of the insurance, either seperately or as part of rent/management charge.

Completely irrelevant whether the buildings policy will pay out to the tenant (although you are corrrect - they normally wouldnt).

DM

rs65

bryanb wrote: »

I think you are wrong.

The article has changed.

It did say

Only freeholders need buildings cover. Renters & leaseholders just contents.

It now says

Freeholders need buildings cover. Renters just contents.

bryanb

Dangermac wrote: »

Completely irrelevant whether the buildings policy will pay out to the tenant (although you are corrrect - they normally wouldnt).

DM

It's not irrelevant if the tenant is the policyholder.

Dangermac

bryanb wrote: »

It's not irrelevant if the tenant is the policyholder.

You are completely missing the point. It is irrelevant.

The OP's question related to payment of the premium.

Whether the OP (i.e tenant) has an insurable interest or not, he will still have to pay the premium (either directly or indirectly).

DM

bryanb

Dangermac wrote: »

You are completely missing the point. It is irrelevant.

The OP's question related to payment of the premium.

Whether the OP (i.e tenant) has an insurable interest or not, he will still have to pay the premium (either directly or indirectly).

DM

OK I'll make it simple for you. I asked if the OP is the policyholder. That means did he take out the insurance policy.

If he pays directly to the insurance company and the policy is in his name, they will not honour the policy if he claims and they find he has no insurable interest.
Capisco?

olly300

bryanb wrote: »

OK I'll make it simple for you. I asked if the OP is the policyholder. That means did he take out the insurance policy.

If he pays directly to the insurance company and the policy is in his name, they will not honour the policy if he claims and they find he has no insurable interest.
Capisco?

He does have an insurable interest.

Leases in England and Wales are not all the same.

If the building burns down he loses his home and depending on the wording in the lease the freeholder may not pay for anything in his flat including the division of the walls, kitchen units, fixed flooring and bathroom sanitary ware even though they pay to rebuild the external structure of the building. (OK the leaseholder pays indirectly but the freeholder pays directly.)

When I was looking to buy property in London I was made aware of the different leases people had by asking them.

There were buildings where it was up to you how you divided your space and that meant if the building burnt down, you have to pay for the walls and the suspended floors to be replaced how you had it as well as for the kitchen units, bathroom sanitary ware and fitted flooring.

On the other hand there were buildings where the freeholder paid for what people traditionally associated with buildings insurance.

In the first case you have to have your own building insurance to ensure everything in your flat is covered there as in the second case you only have to pay for contents insurance.

I'm in the middle. I can choose to have extended contents cover but it works out cheaper to have a buildings and contents policy.