Building insurance invalid because relative took out policy on house I own

pipin129

Hi
its a long story but when my gran died she left me her house with a condition that my uncle could live there until he died. I never charged my uncle any rent or had any type of tenancy agreement he just lived there and got on with his life paying his own bills. Unfortunately there was a fire at the property in which my uncle lost his life and the property was burnt to the ground. The insurance company are now saying that because the buildings insurance was in my uncles name and not mine the policy is invalid.
I'm hoping someone can help me on here I've looked endlessly on-line but can't find anyone who's been in the same position. Life is already bad enough with everything that's happened

InsideInsurance

What did they declare their status was in connection to the property when they were buying the buildings cover? Owner? Tenant?

McKneff

Why did you not have buildings insurance or even talk to your relative about insurance.


I wonder if the contents were covered then your relatives executuors could possibly claim for these and
the money added to the estate?

pipin129

The insurer was changed in 2011. We're guessing that he went into the bank to pay money in and the staff signed him up to a new contents/building insurance. He was at that time 91 (94 when he died) and have no idea yet whether he put owner/tenant.
They say he's insured for contents only. I never got building insurance as i didn't think I needed it. Although the deeds were in my name I never seen it as a landlord/tenant situation.

InsideInsurance

pipin129 wrote: »

The insurer was changed in 2011. We're guessing that he went into the bank to pay money in and the staff signed him up to a new contents/building insurance. He was at that time 91 (94 when he died) and have no idea yet whether he put owner/tenant.
They say he's insured for contents only. I never got building insurance as i didn't think I needed it. Although the deeds were in my name I never seen it as a landlord/tenant situation.

So whats the issue? You cant expect them to pay out on buildings insurance he never held so obviously thats not the problem. Is it the contents insurance they are disputing? You've found the policy, did the paperwork not have the schedule with it which would have the answers to the questions on it?

Did the property come furnished or is it is own possessions in there?

pipin129

InsideInsurance wrote: »

So whats the issue? You cant expect them to pay out on buildings insurance he never held so obviously thats not the problem. Is it the contents insurance they are disputing? You've found the policy, did the paperwork not have the schedule with it which would have the answers to the questions on it?

Did the property come furnished or is it is own possessions in there?

He did have building insurance and contents but because the property was left to me in my grans will they're saying the building insurance is invalid as it was in my uncles name. Unfortunately I don't have the policy or any other documentation everything was destroyed in the fire.

InsideInsurance

pipin129 wrote: »

They say he's insured for contents only.

pipin129 wrote: »

He did have building insurance and contents

These two comments are contradictory but it could be your choice of words.

Assuming you are the executor, ultimately contact the insurers and ask for a copy of the schedule which will enable you to find out what status he declared himself to be in relation to the property.

At the same time do a dummy quote online with this insurer and see if they will allow a tenant to insure the building - most wont unfortunately but a few do as contractually you can be made liable and thus have an insurable risk.

If he has lied on his application form and they dont allow tenants to insure the builds then you have a slim chance of getting anything

pipin129

My own fault but didn't realise that if the property was transferred to me ..... even though I didn't live there, charged no rent and had no tenancy agreement with my relative ..... I was responsible for buildings insurance. My uncle always sorted out his own finances and bills and its been this way for over 15 years. Shocking to learn that during all this time the property was not covered for building insurance.
The insurance company who he was formally with even paid out on two claims (roof and fencing)

InsideInsurance

pipin129 wrote: »

The insurance company who he was formally with even paid out on two claims (roof and fencing)

Level of checks done are proportional to the value of the claim + the results of their inevitable "fraud scorecard"

Caz3121

pipin129 wrote: »

I never got building insurance as i didn't think I needed it. Although the deeds were in my name I never seen it as a landlord/tenant situation.

Buildings insurance is not compulsary if there is no mortgage on the property. There is bound to have been some sort of policy that would provide buildings cover for your situation

I may be wrong but I would expect that they are correct. I am not sure to what extent they check these things out. eg if you owned a diamond necklace and I was able to take a policy out on it, if it was stolen should the insurance pay out to me? I would expect I should not be able to take a policy out on it in the first place as I do not own it

System

pipin129 wrote: »

Hi
its a long story but when my gran died she left me her house with a condition that my uncle could live there until he died.

A legal opinion would be useful. If there was an interest in possession trust created by the will then he was the beneficial owner. A beneficial owner has an insurable interest, and is treated as the owner for example for tax purposes. Legal owner is not the same as beneficial owner, so there might be something worth pursuing here, depending on the wording of the will.

You might also need advice for tax purposes (IHT and CGT)