Landlords insurance without consent to let

chlozzi

We are in the process of remortgaging at the moment - valuation done and fine, so it should now be a matter of days :j

But, we are planning a two year trip abroad, leaving in two months. We are planning to rent our house out, but we are still unsure about whether to ask our new mortgage lender for consent to let or to just not mention it.

We wouldn't feel comfortable renting our house out without landlords insurance, but without consent to let:
a) would the insurance company pay out in the event of a claim?
b) will our mortgage company find out we've taken out landlords insurance as they will be named as an interested party on the policy?

Or if we just stick to no landlords insurance and keep our normal residential buildings and contents insurance, but we rent the house out, will we be covered if our house is burnt down?

Thanks everyone - I've been grappling with this issue for quite a while now and am not sure what to do.

haras_nosirrah

so really you should have got a 2 year btl mortgage rather than a residential mortgage. Lender is likely to be miffed if you have got the mortgage under false pretences and don't think your insurance will be valid without it. Which lender are you remortgaging to? Did you tell the broker or if you are doing it direct the mortgage arranger your plans?

chlozzi

We went direct to Chelsea Building Society. We wanted to take the mortgage out first then switch to a consent to let. We deliberately chose a lender that will in principle does consent to let and we know they tend to increase the interest rate by 1%. We only own this property and this is our home so we didn't think we should have to take a buy to let mortgage out.

Jen_Lucy

You need to be up-front with both the mortgage provider and any insurer you decide to go with.

I'm with Simple for landlords insurance and if you look at their policy document it will explain these things if you're unclear.

If you apply for insurance you have a duty to provide accurate information as this is what the insurer will use in deciding whether to accept the insurance. If they find out you have deliberately provided false information it could invalid any policy or cause them to decline any claim made. Best to be honest. Also it would be worth checking on who would be managing the rental property while you are out of the country. Some insurers require policy holders be resident in the UK for a certain time period each year or to be permanent residents.

Hope that helps!

dacouch

haras_nosirrah wrote: »

so really you should have got a 2 year btl mortgage rather than a residential mortgage. Lender is likely to be miffed if you have got the mortgage under false pretences and don't think your insurance will be valid without it. Which lender are you remortgaging to? Did you tell the broker or if you are doing it direct the mortgage arranger your plans?

Not having consent to let is unlikely in most cases to cause a problem with an Insurer providing you take out a landlords policy.

Check to see if it asks if you have consent to let, I've not seen a landlord policy that asks / requires this though

Yorkie1

OP's other thread on his general plans is here:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4608681=

silvercar

try alanboswell.com

They specialise in landlord property insurance and also now do residential property insurance. Well reviewed on landlord forums.

Following many arguments on the housing board about this issue I won't comment on there, but there was a trawl of the T&C on landlord insurances once and no-one could find specific mention of consent to let as a condition of the landlord insurance. AFAIK if an insurer refused to pay out just because you didn't have CTL they would have to show that not having the CTL in some way increased the likelihood of a claim ie it had some bearing on the policy.

Obviously you need landlord insurance and the insurer will register the interest of the mortgage company. Some lenders require you to notify them the name of your insurer, so they can be satisfied you have the building insured. If you are not going to get CTL, there is no point the insurer being called we.insure.landlords.com.

dacouch

silvercar wrote: »

Following many arguments on the housing board about this issue I won't comment on there, but there was a trawl of the T&C on landlord insurances once and no-one could find specific mention of consent to let as a condition of the landlord insurance. AFAIK if an insurer refused to pay out just because you didn't have CTL they would have to show that not having the CTL in some way increased the likelihood of a claim ie it had some bearing on the policy.

and obviously the Insurer would also need a CLEAR question or statement about consent to let.

If they're relying on the actual policy wording containing a stipulation about CTL they would really need to bring it to your attention at the buying stage