Home insurance and continuity of cover

Dani_71

Hi all, has anybody managed to successfully obtain continuity of cover for home insurance, continuing the previous homeowners policy.

We are in the process of moving, we had a survey on the house that we are purchasing and the surveyor noted some cracks in between the original house and single story extension that was build 30 years ago. They suggested asking the sellers who their current home insurance is with and then contacting this company to request ‘continuity of cover’, so that this existing issue would still be covered if we ever needed to claim.

We have done this and contacted their current insurer (The Post Office) who say there is no such thing! 

We have gone back to the surveyor who had said that it is likely that they do not want to take this on, as they would then be liable to payout if we claimed on the existing issue, but that we should continue to pursue it.

Any advice welcome.

Thanks in advance.

Annemos

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-3897491.pdf



 When an insurer accepts a subsidence claim, its best practice for it to offer a renewal to its policyholder, including ongoing subsidence cover. And to extend that offer to a potential purchaser of the house when the time comes. That avoids policyholders and/or potential buyers finding themselves unable to secure subsidence cover at a reasonable cost on the open market. As the claim will now be accepted, SOL should ensure the underwriter offers ongoing subsidence cover to Mr H and to a potential purchaser in the future, in line with best practice.


I’m aware of ABI agreements which insurers can chose to opt into or out of, such as the one mentioned by SOL. But I don’t think that’s the case with the guidance I’m referring to as it isn’t an ‘agreement’ as such, it’s guidance on best practice across the home insurance industry. Even if SOL and A could and had opted out of it, I would still find it fair and reasonable for the guidance to be followed by these businesses. That’s because the guidance represents long-established good industry practice. And Mr H would be put to significant detriment if the guidance weren’t followed. Similarly, I don’t think it’s relevant whether SOL or A are members of ABI – the guidance represents best practice across the industry, so I’m satisfied it would be fair and reasonable for it to be taken into account in this case.




Note, that cases only apply to the homeowner in question. But I do find they can give an indication to Subsidence homeowners as to what is considered "best practice" within the Insurance Industry ! 

(I have seen comments within cases, that the FOS is aware that the Housing Market should not be negatively affected by houses that have subsided, if at all possible.) 

Also note, that in this case, it concerns a Subsidence claim that is ongoing. I do not know what their opinion would be if a claim has already been settled and then the home is sold. 

Good luck with this.  The current Owner would have to pursue this, I feel, not you. The Current Owner would themselves have to open up a Subsidence Claim. (And at the moment they might be reluctant to do that, as they do not know if it is actually Subsidence that has caused the separation.) 

DullGreyGuy

Dani_71 said:

We have done this and contacted their current insurer (The Post Office) who say there is no such thing! 

Post Office isn't an insurer, Ageas is their current insurer (since 2020) for the bulk of the sections and the PO dont have claims handling authority. 

Unfortunately the ABI agreement is in relation to a policyholder renewing cover and doesn't cover a change of policyholder/property owner. In principle at that point all bets are off because the buyer's purchase price should reflect the condition of the property including prior subsidence and so no longer the obligation of the insurer to carry the can.