Insurance - Accidental Glass Breakage said I must claim through landlord

Im a tenant and my daughter (8yo) accidentally walked into a glass sliding door on the rental property. The sliding door window shattered and shards of glass collapsed everywhere. She was thankfully not injured

I have tenant insurance which is "contents only" (because I'm a tenant) but I have cover options of accidental glass breakage specified in my policy - "You’re covered for accidental breakage or fracture through the entire thickness of the item, such as a window or glass panels" - word for word on my policy

My insurer says that this is a building insurance item and I must go through the landlords building insurance.

Surely because it was an accident and I have specifically taken out "accidental glass breakage" insurance that this should be covered. The insurer on the phone said that that line means if you accidentally break a TV "glass" panel or iPad screen that is covered but not a sliding door window.
Why should the onus be on the landlord to have to claim through building insurance?

 

You write that you're the tenant, but at the end it sounds like you're the LL...? I'm not sure.
The cynic in me might say this is an odd first post, especially with the poll at the top and the wording in it.

I'm sure your insurance policy has plenty of fine print to check for specifics.

Anyway, hope your daughter is okay. My mate walked into a glass sliding door at my family's place many years ago and took a huge chunk out of his knee. This was on NYE and we were heading to Byron. We patched him up pretty good and put a waterproof bandage on and he was good to go!

 

I'm a tenant, I moved here from south africa 2 years ago and have owned 3 properties in South Africa so I do know both sides of the story. I dont think my insurance should insist on the landlords insurance and the poll was to add an opinion, nothing cynical. But to have wording in my insurance to cover glass breakage and then turn around to say claim for the landlord is in my opinion false advertising. I just hate paying for something and feeling ripped off. Its the principal of the matter.

 

@wylie is right, however it's my experience that glass is cheaper than the excess on insurance claims. It might be cheaper & easier to just get it fixed yourself and not worry about making a claim.

 

In order to insure something, you have to have an 'insurable interest', which effectively means you must own it (or otherwise be responsible for it).

In the context of a rental property, you don't own the glass window; the landlord does. If it was broken in a storm, it would be the landlord's responsibility to fix.

You have to pay to repair it because it was negligently broken, but only your landlord has an 'insurable interest'. If the landlord's policy covers this and it's worth making a claim, they may choose to do so and only charge you their policy's excess.

Your insurer is not attempting to rip you off; they're correctly stating the law.

Some policies will cover your damage to somebody else's property - eg rental car insurance - but contents cover doesn't, typically.

 

The Tenant policy includes the liability for glass breakage in this case though the exact terms of coverage aren't clear.

 

Who is the insurer and what does the PDS say in detail? E.g. what are they pointing to as an exclusion etc.

 

Because the door is a part of the building. Its not an asset covered by your insurance. Imagine if you could be covered for all glass you break - Your friends house, neighbour etc. And it depends on the terms the owners policy has but whether they claim is up to them. You damaged the property and must remedy that. You may be liable for the damage to the extent its is not insured. Many glass policies have an accidental cover provision with $0 or minor excess. Dont assume you can rely on the owners insurance. Its like any other form of property damage.

Occupant contents insurance that covers glass breakage is often limited to tables, desks and similar matters. Most policies include building and contents in one PDF and it must be read for the policy specific cover eg If its a building policy term and you only have contents then you should read the contents terms. Sometimes a claim can be BOTH ! I encountered this recently. I broke a pipe which is a building term. Then the water damaged items in the house - contents. So two claims,two excesses. Then they noted the pipe damage was TWO claims also. The pipe was an accidental breakage and its terms limit cover to the pipe ONLY. The ceiling was a consequential damage claim...So three claims for one event.

 

Apologies no requirement for an insurable interest - Insurance Contracts Act 1984 s 16.

The issue is that it's a *contents* insurance policy. These specifically exclude fixtures and fittings of real property - such as window glass.

Yes, iit covers glass, but only glass within the category "contents". It doesn't become a building insurance policy because the building has glass.

 

These are really additional features of a contents policy to cover specific liability. e.g. From the Allianz PDS:

✔ If you are a tenant in a rental property, we will also pay for accidental breakage of a fixed glass or ceramic item, like a window, cooking surface, sink or toilet if you are legally liable as a tenant to pay for the breakage.

 

No harm in asking your LL if they can claim on their insurance and offer to pay the excess if it's a viable way. I had a tenant break a glass shower screen years ago and it was covered by my insurance, excess wasn't much at that time, and they done me a favour as they replaced the whole shower screen with a complete new one.

 

Sure, but that's not standard, and if the OP's policy doesn't say this, then she doesn't have this cover.

 

But the OP has stated that in their first post that they have this additional feature,

I have tenant insurance which is "contents only" (because I'm a tenant) but I have cover options of accidental glass breakage specified in my policy - "You’re covered for accidental breakage or fracture through the entire thickness of the item, such as a window or glass panels" - word for word on my policy.

I would go back to your insurer and point out this policy extension as the person handling your claim may have missed it.

 

It doesn't specifically refer to damage caused by a tenant to the landlord's property.

I would think it's because the insurer uses the same PDS and definitions for building and contents insurance.

But to avoid further speculation, @baz007 let me know the insurer - here or via PM, and I'll have a read of the PDS.