Can’t delete old posts

Rich4047

Hi. Couldn’t delete this old post. Only edit. So edited 😀

 

Ebe_Scrooge

It's not a legal requirement, but some letting agents do require it as part of their T&Cs.  You're right that things like fire and flood should be covered by the landlord's own buildings insurance - the tenant's insurance is more to make sure that any damage you cause to their property is covered.

AskAsk

here is info on the insurance.  you are also better off posting this in the house buying and renting section of the forum

https://www.endsleigh.co.uk/personal/home-insurance/guide/what-is-tenants-liability-cover/

Carrot007

Rich4047 said:

I thought the owner of the property would have Building Insurance (if that is the right term) which would cover against fire/flooding etc but possibly I’m wrong.

They mean if you cause a fire / flood. Though even then should be covered on theirs under accidental in most cases.

However they can require you to have it. So get it or go somewhere else.

greatcrested

This is basically a scam. The letting agent gets commission for selling the policy.

No - it is not a legal requirement.

Yes, a landlord should have (again, not mandatory but very sensible!) buildings (and contents if furnished) insurance. Most LLs policies cover accidental or malicious damage by tenants.

Most sensible LLs also take a deposit from tenants (up to 5 weeks rent) which would cover most damage scenarios. Bigger issues like a fire would be covered by the LLs insurance.

Having said that, it's likely the agent will not grant the tenany unless you take out their policy!

The solution is to take out the policy, get the tenancy agreement signed, and then cancel the policy in the 14 day period.

SeaVixen

Rich4047 said:

"Otherwise you would need to provide us with sufficient savings to prove that if there are any damages to the property because of fire or flood you would be able to cover it.”

All the above advice seems sensible. However, before spending money on an insurance policy I'd be tempted to ask what amount they consider to be "sufficient savings". If it turns out to be an amount that you already have access to, you've saved yourself the cost of insurance that you (more than likely) won't need. 

Chances are they'll reply with a ridiculous amount - possibly even the rebuild cost of the property -  so it's worth doing comparisons for the insurance in the meantime anyway.