Don't understand why buildings insurance quotes are so different

elsbeth

I'm buying buildings insurance for the first time and really struggling to work out what policy I should buy.

I've had quotes for around £150 from LV and esure, and quotes around £360 from NFU Mutual and Halifax.

I've read all the small print from LV and NFU Mutual in detail and I can't see any significant differences. I also found a tool NFU Mutal have [home-buildings-insurance-comparison/ but can't post URL as new user] to compare policies and couldn't see any differences there.

Although the cheap esure one even includes free home emergency cover which the others don't.

Is there something I'm missing? I mentioned the £150 quote to my solicitor and he was quite surprised and said I shouldn't skimp on insurance. But I don't want to pay extra for no reason - can anyone shed some light on this please? It's a 4 bed house in a good neighbourhood, standard construction and no history of problems.

FutureGirl

Have you read the policies of both?

Are the limits the same? The coverage the same? Exclusions the same?

I tend to find the cheaper policies have more exclusions.

elsbeth

Thanks for your message - yes, yes and yes! I can't see any differences of significance.

FutureGirl

If you've read the policy booklets to check all the exclusions for each peril, and they're all the same, and the limits are all the same then go for the cheapest.

Do they both have Accidental Damage cover?

dacouch

Avoid esure...

FutureGirl

The first difference I see is that NFU doesn't cover you if your property is unoccupied, but LV will cover for for any un-occupancy for the first 60 days.

NFU covers you for removing 'nests' of rats, mice, cockroaches, wasps and bees - but LV policy doesn't.

NFU covers you to remove squatters, LV doesn't.

LV has more exclusions for Escape of Water claims.

dacouch

FutureGirl wrote: »

The first difference I see is that NFU doesn't cover you if your property is unoccupied, but LV will cover for for any un-occupancy for the first 60 days.

Where are you getting that NFU don't cover the property if it's unoccupied?

Their normal home insurance has fairly standard unoccupancy restrictions which are comparable with LV on their standard policy..

FutureGirl

Their policy booklet is a tad misleading in that instead of having the 60 day exclusion under the peril, it has it under the definition of the term unoccupied!

dacouch

I thought it was fairly clear.

They give their definition of the word "Unoccupied" as

"UNOCCUPIED
This is when the HOME is:
• insufficiently furnished for normal occupation for more than 14 days; or
• furnished but not used to provide overnight accommodation for YOU or any visitor with YOUR
permission for more than 60 consecutive days."

Which is a fairly consumer friendly definition.

The NFU is a decent policy and a very good Insurer, although I suspect the difference is difficult to justify for the OP.

The LV is a good policy and a good Insurer (NFU are better though) and many many times better than esure who are an Insurer to avoid

elsbeth

Thanks so much both for reviewing, I really appreciate it.

Removing nests - I would imagine this wouldn't be that expensive to pay for yourself, and maybe not even worth making a claim given the excess and sacrificing no claims bonus.

I hadn't spotted the squatters one, thanks, but given the price difference and the fact that I don't know anyone (even friend of a friend) it's happened to, I think I'm prepared to take the risk of having to shell out myself.

Escape of water - both of them exclude "subsidence, heave or landslip caused by escaping water" which sounds like the most expensive/serious outcome. LV also excludes "damage to the tank, appliance or pipe itself, unless caused by freezing; damage caused by the failure, wear and tear or lack of grouting or sealant" which sounds like it would be only a small part of the expenses of an incident? I agree it's not ideal though.

Also I forgot to mention that the NFU policy includes legal expenses cover, but that's not something that's particularly important to me. (Still get public liability on both.)

I guess my overall thinking at this stage is to stick the saved premium into an 'emergency funds' savings account and if one incident happens per say 5 years that isn't covered by LV but would have been covered by NFU, it would hopefully cover it.

elsbeth

Forgot to mention in response to your question FutureGirl - both have standard accidental damage cover and neither have extended. So comparable on that front too.