Home Insurance - Add my wife ?

Dan-Dan

now that`s a dilemma , helpful but also spam :-)

kingstreet

Two contacts have now replied to me and told me if the insurer is made aware that the property and mortgage are held in one name, they should not accept a joint application for buildings insurance.

If you do intend to apply that way, please ensure you discuss this with the insurer first.

Spam post now removed, so post edited to remove FCA links.

Please be careful to ensure any firm you deal with is properly authorised and regulated and has the correct consumer protection measures in place.

dacouch

kingstreet wrote: »

Two contacts have now replied to me and told me if the insurer is made aware that the property and mortgage are held in one name, they should not accept a joint application for buildings insurance.

If you do intend to apply that way, please ensure you discuss this with the insurer first.

Spam post now removed, so post edited to remove FCA links.

Please be careful to ensure any firm you deal with is properly authorised and regulated and has the correct consumer protection measures in place.

So a his wife has no insurable interest in the home they presumably jointly own... lol

kingstreet

She is neither owner, nor mortgagor.

Hence the issue.

dacouch

kingstreet wrote: »

She is neither owner, nor mortgagor.

Hence the issue.

She's not a mortgagor however I would be surprised if she did not consider herself part owner of the house and would be equally surprised if the OP did not consider her part owner.

After all they are man and wife

kingstreet

She will not be party to the ownership if she isn't party to the mortgage. Legally, she has no insurable interest in the property.

I understand the moral implication here and all I'm suggesting is the OP ensures his insurer is happy with the situation before he embarks on the plan to take joint cover.

FWIW I think it's daft, but that doesn't absolve the proposer of the obligation/sense in making sure it's going to be acceptable right up-front.

dacouch

http://www.out-law.com/en/topics/insurance/insurance-law-and-liability/reforming-insurance-law-insurable-interest/

"The 1906 Act defines insurable interest as where a person stands “in any legal or equitablerelation to the adventure or to any insurable property at risk therein, in consequence of whichhe may benefit by the safety or due arrival of insurable property, or may be prejudiced by itsloss, or damage thereto, or by the detention thereof, or may incur liability in respect thereof”. In other words, a person who may suffer financial loss from an event has an insurable interest in the property or interest which is insured against that event. The event must create upon the insured a commercial loss or liability, or it must affect a right of the insured which is recognised and protected by the courts."

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/gimanual/gim1050.htm

kingstreet

I know what the definition of insurable interest is, I'm recounting conversations I've had with two contacts in the insurance industry who have told me to make sure the OP checks his insurer is happy with a joint application before he proceeds.

I'm not arguing the merits of, or lack of common sense in this situation, I'm simply warning the OP to talk to his insurer before he does it.

rs65

I find it hard to believe that a spouse doesn't have insurable interest in a property owned by a spouse. After all, if death or divorce occurred, they would own all or maybe half of it.

The contacts you have are saying that separate buildings and contents policies would be required.

I can understand a mortgage provider not wanting the spouse named if they do not own the house as they may get in the way if a claim occurred.

My parents jointly owned their house but the insurance was only in his name. My understanding is that spouses are effectively treated as a legal entity.

rs65

Was there not something about the Gambling Act changing the need from insurable interest to just interest where indemnity contracts are involved (insurable interest remaining for non-indemnity contracts).