Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community

Denial of Access Payout From Insurance

Discussion in 'General Property Chat' started by rhinsor, 18th Apr, 2016.

Tags:
  1. rhinsor

    rhinsor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    437
    Location:
    Perth
    Hi all,

    I'm just wondering if anyone can help me get my head around an insurance PDS.

    I had to get my tenant removed through a court order and then pay for a bailiff to remove them as they ignored the court order, they moved the day before the bailiff was to remove them.

    The lease finished on 08/01/2016 according to the original lease.
    The court terminated the lease on 07/01/2016.
    The tenant didn't move out until the 20/01/2016 due to having to wait for the court order, paperwork, apply for Seizure and delivery order etc.

    My insurance says that because the original lease finished on the 08/01/16 they only have to pay up until then even though the tenant was their until 20/01/16. 12 extra days.

    I've been told as their is no ongoing lease liability after the date that the lease has expired they do not have to pay.

    The PDS says I am covered for denial of access.

    Can anyone advise?
     

    Attached Files:

    • 1.JPG
      1.JPG
      File size:
      82.4 KB
      Views:
      16
    • 2.JPG
      2.JPG
      File size:
      44 KB
      Views:
      15
  2. Marg4000

    Marg4000 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    909
    Location:
    Qld
    Ask for the decision and reasons in writing. By law, this must include details of the appeals process if you are not happy with the decision.
    Marg
     
  3. melbournian

    melbournian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    2nd Sep, 2015
    Posts:
    1,320
    Location:
    melbourne
  4. dabbler

    dabbler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,675
    Location:
    Sid en e - olympic city
    Some insurers only provide insurance when a valid lease is in place, from all the PDS's I have read.

    If you can't find this, ask them to show where in the PDS they are relying on, this is what I think they are doing.

    PS for 20 odd days, is it worth claiming would be what I would look at, as your insurer probably has an excess too ?
     
  5. Jess Peletier

    Jess Peletier Mortgage Broker - Australia Wide Business Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,764
    Location:
    Perth WA
    Who's the insurer?

    I had a similar thing where my tenants didn't move out for 2 months after the lease ended, and I had 4 months of no rent - 3 while they were in the house, and one after, while we renovated the property. My insurer paid out until after I finished the reno and the property was ready to be re-let.
     
  6. MTR

    MTR Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    7,372
    Location:
    Perth, Melbourne, USA
    Jess Peletier and Tranquilo like this.
  7. dabbler

    dabbler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,675
    Location:
    Sid en e - olympic city
    Not sure what happened for you, but if it is clearly spelt out in the PDS, would make it hard to argue with ?

    instead of having an attitude of helping loyal customers, they are often looking at ways out of a claim.
     
  8. MTR

    MTR Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    7,372
    Location:
    Perth, Melbourne, USA
    right ok

    my scenario different I guess, took 12 months of persistence, patience and a paper war

    it was insurance companies word against my word, basically a no win scenario for me.

    It was overturned on a technicality, but if I had not documented in detail I would have received zip.
     
  9. melbournian

    melbournian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    2nd Sep, 2015
    Posts:
    1,320
    Location:
    melbourne
    yup overtuned $17,000 & $50,000 in my favour too though one was for travel.
     
    MTR likes this.
  10. rhinsor

    rhinsor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    437
    Location:
    Perth
    It's with EBM. I've asked the assessor where it says in the PDS that payout won't occur after the fixed lease ends.
     
  11. dabbler

    dabbler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,675
    Location:
    Sid en e - olympic city
    My understanding is that they require a lease initially, then week to week is ok after, would have to check PDS.

    Do a search on the PDS for denial and what they pay for etc
     
  12. Biz

    Biz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,473
    Location:
    Sydney
    EBM white knights of the forum. :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: 18th Apr, 2016
  13. Waldo

    Waldo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    222
    Location:
    South Australia
    Disappointing to hear it is with EBM - they tend to have a good reputation on the forum. Let us know which way it goes, it seems to be a pretty black and white case from what you've said?
     
  14. dabbler

    dabbler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,675
    Location:
    Sid en e - olympic city
    Your post of section 4 seems to point out they would not pay a claim.

    But you had a valid lease ? and the court terminated on 7th ? where the 8th it would have expired.

    Look forward to the full explanation and outcome.
     
  15. Nick Valsamis

    Nick Valsamis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    20th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    504
    Location:
    Sydney
    My interpretation is the following.

    Insurance will only compensate you during the time that the tenant was there and denied access. Even though the lease has been terminated, the tenant is still liable for as long as they continue to remain in the property.

    Now insurance will not pay for the vacancy period after the tenant has been removed due to having been denied access to re-let the property.

    Perhaps @brettc can clear this up.
     
  16. Xenia

    Xenia Adelaide Property Manager Business Member

    Joined:
    21st Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,345
    Location:
    4/136 The Parade Norwood, South Australia
    Many claims are rejected first off, challenge it.
     
  17. JDM

    JDM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    19th Jan, 2016
    Posts:
    145
    Location:
    London (ex Brisbane)
    I would definitely request their reasons in writing and then go to FOS if you believe you have grounds. The cost of going through FOS for the insurer is probably going to exceed a few weeks rent so the insurer may just pay out to avoid FOS.
     
  18. rhinsor

    rhinsor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    437
    Location:
    Perth
    So pretty much the problem I am having is that my insurance will not pay denial of access after the 7th.
    They said because the court terminated the lease on the 7th I have been given possession of the property and that is where the tenants liability to pay rent ends.

    I never got possession until the 20th, the day before the bailiff was to attend.

    I'm not sure if they are mixed up with W.A. laws but I am now getting annoyed I have to spend time read and writing this.
     
  19. brettc

    brettc Well-Known Member Business Plus Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    112
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    Without going into too much detail, when I inquired about this it was already in the process of being revised. The original claim form stated that the tenant vacated on 06/01/2016 and therefore is what the settlement was based on. It was only yesterday that we were advised that the landlord did not receive possession until 20/01/16 and a revised settlement was calculated and has been forwarded to the landlord. This indeed included denial of access as per the policy.

    Unfortunately, with the various areas that details need to be provided to settle a claim it can be confusing and there can be misunderstandings. It shows how important it is that if you are not happy with a settlement and believe you have good reason converse back with the company, whoever it is, and hopefully sort it out, which is what occurred in this instance.
     
    Xenia and S.T like this.
  20. rhinsor

    rhinsor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    437
    Location:
    Perth
    You are right Brett. The wrong date was in one part of the form.

    Thanks for having a look at it.

    It was very confusing on both sides so I wondered why I was being told it wasn't covered.

    :D
     
    Xenia likes this.