Home insurance questions

eddddy

FataVerde said:

@canaldumidi and @user1977 Here are the Lease clauses, a mouthful, but note the original lease was amended when the share of freehold was bought:

<snip>

The 'renewal' lease says the freeholder (lessor) is responsible for insurance, not the leaseholders.

So the joint freeholders should be taking out a joint buildings insurance policy for the whole building.

Do you know why that isn't happening?

In your position, that might worry me a little. i.e. I'd be about to become joint freeholder with somebody who doesn't seem to adhere to the terms of the leases.




Edit to add...

And it seems a bit strange that the joint freeholders specifically changed the lease to make the freeholders responsible for insurance....

.... but then ignored the changes and continued to insure it as leaseholders.

user1977

eddddy said:

FataVerde said:

@canaldumidi and @user1977 Here are the Lease clauses, a mouthful, but note the original lease was amended when the share of freehold was bought:

<snip>

So the joint freeholders should be taking out a joint buildings insurance policy for the whole building.

Do you know why that isn't happening?

And have you actually discussed with your solicitor what they think you ought to be doing about insurance?

FataVerde

eddddy said:

FataVerde said:

@canaldumidi and @user1977 Here are the Lease clauses, a mouthful, but note the original lease was amended when the share of freehold was bought:

<snip>

The 'renewal' lease says the freeholder (lessor) is responsible for insurance, not the leaseholders.

So the joint freeholders should be taking out a joint buildings insurance policy for the whole building.

Do you know why that isn't happening?

In your position, that might worry me a little. i.e. I'd be about to become joint freeholder with somebody who doesn't seem to adhere to the terms of the leases.




Edit to add...

And it seems a bit strange that the joint freeholders specifically changed the lease to make the freeholders responsible for insurance....

.... but then ignored the changes and continued to insure it as leaseholders.

Yes, I am a bit worried about this, but it seems many share of freeholders in the neighbourhood made this choice. The owners who bought the freehold have since sold so these are new owners. The original owners who bought the freehold also had a deed of covenant but it seems the following owners did not continue the practice. My plan is to approach the neighbour after moving in with the offer to get a block policy. They might be a bit reluctant before they know me. Who knows?

FataVerde

user1977 said:

eddddy said:

FataVerde said:

@canaldumidi and @user1977 Here are the Lease clauses, a mouthful, but note the original lease was amended when the share of freehold was bought:

<snip>

So the joint freeholders should be taking out a joint buildings insurance policy for the whole building.

Do you know why that isn't happening?

And have you actually discussed with your solicitor what they think you ought to be doing about insurance?

Yes, I just got off the phone with him about this and he thinks it should be joint but nobody seems capable of arranging this. I don't yet know the neighbour. 

Sandtree

FataVerde said:

user1977 said:

eddddy said:

FataVerde said:

@canaldumidi and @user1977 Here are the Lease clauses, a mouthful, but note the original lease was amended when the share of freehold was bought:

<snip>

So the joint freeholders should be taking out a joint buildings insurance policy for the whole building.

Do you know why that isn't happening?

And have you actually discussed with your solicitor what they think you ought to be doing about insurance?

Yes, I just got off the phone with him about this and he thinks it should be joint but nobody seems capable of arranging this. I don't yet know the neighbour. 

What do you mean no one can organise this?

The freeholder would buy Block Insurance (an abbreviation of Block of Flats Insurance) which is a type of commercial property insurance. As others have said you won't find this on comparison sites or you direct to consumer brands like Admiral. You need to approach a broker who'll be able to advise on options available... there are some aimed at smaller units and not just 100+ unit skyscrapers etc.

FataVerde

Does anybody know what 'not' refers to in this clause? Is it saying the insurance should not cover "civil commotion" and anything listed after that? And the same for "accidental damage"? Should I read this as "accidental damage" in general or just to "the underground services"?

"The Lessor shall during the term effect and maintain insurance of the building against loss or damage caused by fire explosion lightening earthquake storm floor bursting and overflowing of water tanks apparatus or pipes escape of water or oil impact by aircraft and articles dropped from them impact by vehicles not civil commotion malicious damage theft or attempted theft falling trees and branches and aerials subsidence and heave landslip collision accidental damage to underground services public liability to anyone else and any other risks usually covered under a flat owners comprehensive policy which the lessor decides to insure against from time to time with reputable insurers on fair and reasonable terms that represent value for money for an amount not less than the full reinstatemnet lost subject to any exclusion limitations conditions or excesses that may be imposed by the lessor’s insurer."

FataVerde

Sandtree said:

FataVerde said:

user1977 said:

eddddy said:

FataVerde said:

@canaldumidi and @user1977 Here are the Lease clauses, a mouthful, but note the original lease was amended when the share of freehold was bought:

<snip>

So the joint freeholders should be taking out a joint buildings insurance policy for the whole building.

Do you know why that isn't happening?

And have you actually discussed with your solicitor what they think you ought to be doing about insurance?

Yes, I just got off the phone with him about this and he thinks it should be joint but nobody seems capable of arranging this. I don't yet know the neighbour. 

What do you mean no one can organise this?

The freeholder would buy Block Insurance (an abbreviation of Block of Flats Insurance) which is a type of commercial property insurance. As others have said you won't find this on comparison sites or you direct to consumer brands like Admiral. You need to approach a broker who'll be able to advise on options available... there are some aimed at smaller units and not just 100+ unit skyscrapers etc.

Oh, I see. I'll contact the neighbour to see if she agrees to get a block policy and look for an insurance broker Otherwise, I'd only have the option of insuring my flat separately, I guess.

eddddy

FataVerde said:

I don't yet know the neighbour. 

It's something that you should have pushed back on the seller.

The seller wants to sell you the property - so it's reasonable to ask them why the insurance situation isn't in order, and maybe even say that they must get the insurance situation sorted out (with the neighbour) before you'll buy the property.

(And from the seller's reaction you could have tried to judge whether the problem was that the neighbour was uncooperative, lazy, difficult, etc.)

With the current situation, you've always got the worry that the neighbour isn't insuring their part of the building correctly - although I suspect that's what your indemnity insurance is for. 

FataVerde

eddddy said:

FataVerde said:

I don't yet know the neighbour. 

It's something that you should have pushed back on the seller.

The seller wants to sell you the property - so it's reasonable to ask them why the insurance situation isn't in order, and maybe even say that they must get the insurance situation sorted out (with the neighbour) before you'll buy the property.

(And from the seller's reaction you could have tried to judge whether the problem was that the neighbour was uncooperative, lazy, difficult, etc.)

With the current situation, you've always got the worry that the neighbour isn't insuring their part of the building correctly - although I suspect that's what your indemnity insurance is for. 

I have briefly communicated with the neighbour via email, but it's a long story. I will email them to ask if they'd like to talk about this or meet. This will at least give me a sense of how cooperative they can be on managing issues.

FataVerde

eddddy said:

FataVerde said:

@canaldumidi and @user1977 Here are the Lease clauses, a mouthful, but note the original lease was amended when the share of freehold was bought:

<snip>

The 'renewal' lease says the freeholder (lessor) is responsible for insurance, not the leaseholders.

So the joint freeholders should be taking out a joint buildings insurance policy for the whole building.

Do you know why that isn't happening?

In your position, that might worry me a little. i.e. I'd be about to become joint freeholder with somebody who doesn't seem to adhere to the terms of the leases.




Edit to add...

And it seems a bit strange that the joint freeholders specifically changed the lease to make the freeholders responsible for insurance....

.... but then ignored the changes and continued to insure it as leaseholders.

I reread the leases and you are right. The renewal lease does shift insurance from leaseholders to the freeholder (joint in this case). But then, weirdly, the owners who bought the freehold and created this renewal lease also had a deed of covenant (which was also not carried forth by current owners) which assumes that insurance is the duty of the leaseholders:

"The Lower Lessee covenants with the Upper Lessee to observe the covenants as to repair and insurance of her part of the property at Address." Weird.