Buildings Insurance but I'm the tennant not landlord

smiley_77

Hello,
I hope someone can shed some light on this.
I started renting a property off a family friend 9 years ago. As the rent was quite cheap I agreed to pay the buildings insurance as well. I merrily did this for 9 years. When I rang up to renew, the operative said I couldn't pay because I'm not the owner of the property. They refused to take my payment. I rang back several times and got the same answer. However, I have rung back today and been told it is ok if that is what I agreed with the landlord.

Please could you advise me as to which is true. If I am not liable then I have paid a lot of money for 9 years for something which was never valid. I don't seem to be able to get any sense out of the insurer.

Thanks

Smiley

agrinnall

I don't see that it matters who pays for it, the important thing is who the insured is. I would say that the policy needs to be in your LL's name as they are the ones with the insurable interest in the property. Forget about the last 9 years, make sure you do it right now.

caliew

Hi I have worked in insurance for a number of years but I have just left due to childcare reasons. Are you on the title deeds of the property? If you are not on the title deeds then usually you don't have any insurable interest on the building therefore the landlord is responsible for the buildings insurance. Is there a legal agreement drawn up between you and your landlord whereby you should be paying the buildings insurance? Perhaps you could take it up with your landlord that you have been making this payment for 9 years.

caliew

Also are you sure its buildings insurance and not home emergency insurance?

Sally_A

If it is the terms of your tenancy that you insure the buildings, there is an insurable interest by contract in place (think, people that have cars on lease, they don't own them, but have to insure them).

If I was the owner of the building, as a minimum; I'd ensure my interest was noted - as you could make a claim and do a runner with the money. Also, Property Owners Liability will probably not be in place, this is the norm if the owner insures along with his/her loss of rental income in the event of the property becoming uninhabitable, and therefore not rent-out-able in the event of a loss by an insured peril.

If I owned the building, I would prefer to insure it myself, but reclaim the cost from the tenant - the cover is so much wider on a Property Owners Policy.

As an aside, if the owner bills you for the buildings insurance, they have no right of recourse to reclaim costs from you directly if you damage the building due to you being negligent in some way.

smiley_77

caliew wrote: »

Also are you sure its buildings insurance and not home emergency insurance?

Yes it definitely isCaliew. I took the policy out myself. I did think it was a little strange.

Thanks for all your replies everyone. I am not on the deeds and don't own the property. I didn't know whether I could claim. The landlord was annoyed that the company were refusing my payment. Maybe he should be paying it himself.

Manxman_in_exile

"... I agreed to pay (my emphasis) the buildings insurance..."


I think your friendly landlord should be the policy holder and you should be reimbursing him or her the cost.