Landlord Insurance vs Home Building only Insurance

And they are not following the terms of the lease. Are you really willing to breach them?

 

Insurance isn't there to take all the responsibility. There remains onus on the landlord to do the things that they are required to do.
Don't think that if you have Landlord insurance all the problems either go away or somebody else will look after that, there remains a responsibility on your shoulders.....

 

Just to clarify, damage caused by someone smoking inside would not be likely to be classed as malicious damage. I’ve written multiple posts within PropertyChat on the subject of Malicious vs Accidental Damage, so a search should find those (here is one brief one but others are more extensive landlord insurance, help! ). In essence though for something to be classed as Malicious Damage you need to prove intent, that the tenant caused the damage with the sole intention of damaging your property, not that the damage was simply a consequence of another action. You would also generally be required to have a police report.

It would depend on the specific circumstances which have occurred at the property whether this damage is considered accidental or neglect, which is why is it important to ensure you have a policy which includes Accidental Damage.

 

Damage caused by smoking would generally not be covered by insurance as it is gradual damage caused over time, due to neglect by the tenant, and as others have said the property manager needs to take action to prevent this from occurring. Correct also that insurance won’t cover pre-existing damage, so when you take out a policy you can’t expect the insurer to pay for something that has already occurred, or is continuing to occur.

On the other hand though, a fire caused by smoking would generally not be excluded and still paid by your insurance, it’s still a fire which would be an “insured event” regardless of how it was caused. If started deliberately by the tenant however, make sure your policy will pay that as I have known of insurer’s in the past who have said that they won’t.

 

I am pretty sure I read somewhere that landlord insurance also covers accidental damage ? Might be wrong

 

Thanks Brett.

 

It depends on the policy, some do, most don't. But even with Accidental Damage it's not a free-for-all, there still has to be rules that apply, particularly against things like gradual damage over time, and simply poor living habits, otherwise premiums would not be affordable.

 

Thanks Brett

People in this thread have suggested EBM and Terri Sheer if you can recommend any insurance companies that cover a lot of stuff I will also try get a quote from them

 

Try Brett, the details are at the bottom of his posts.
Remember insurance doesn't take away all the risk, there remains a certain amount of onus on you as a landlord

 

How could I go past recommending EBM RentCover?

 

Passive smoking is not malicious

 

Breach of a lease is not a insurance issue. Insurance only addresses a defined loss that is insured. Policy wording ?

 

You'll probably find cheaper "landlord insurance" at a specialty provider (eg we used to use NRMA years ago before they got up to around $500pa.....changed to Honan for $345pa with better terms a few years ago when we bought our second property).

 

im talking about paying for and cleaning up the damage from it

 

I haven't read all the replies but with the companies I am insured with (building) they call it landlord insurance (as it is tenanted) but it doesn't cover you for things that a Landlord Policy does. I asked if i can not have it and have a normal building insurance and I'm told no, that that IS the building insurance for tenanted properties. You would still need another policy if you want rental arrears etc covered. .Read what's covered. I'm in the process of changing insurers.

 

What they would be referring to is that you are still getting some "landlord" benefits, such as should the property suffer a defined event (such as a fire), you would presumably be covered for loss of rent due to that event. As opposed to, as you say, the tenant-related risks such as breaking a lease or tenant default, which would be covered under what you are referring to as the "landlord policy".

The best example I can give is that if you were insuring a rental house with RentCover, you get to a point where you are asked whether you would like to be covered for tenant-related risks such as default of rent, broken leases and damage by the tenant. If you say NO, you get a Householders Rental (Building & Contents “defined risks”) policy, if you say YES, you get a RentCoverPlatinum policy (which includes the tenant-related risks).

 

Thanks for the replies.
As I am 'old', and aren't interested in the rent default, broken lease, damage by tenant options I've gone with APIA. Hopefully it's adequate for my needs.