By Steve Roulstone.
Over the last three weeks, different issues have arisen concerning Insurance, all of which are worthy of note but not to the stage where they warrant their own blog, but they are important enough in my opinion to be explained especially as for Landlords who are trying to deal with Insurance when renting your home, they do cause both concern and confusion.
Clarification.
There are two TV adverts that at present need clarifying, the first being the advert for Direct Line, where they mention Landlords Insurance. The reason this causes confusion and I have already had several Landlords who now believe that what Direct Line offer is a new product that they must also take, is that as an Industry, Landlords Insurance means ‘Rent and Legal Expenses’ cover. What the advert is talking about is Buildings Insurance which is for Landlords, by no means a special product, as the Insurance Companies that specialise in the Industry have been around as long as the Industry has.
Landlord spy.
The second advert, also by Direct Line, flies so much in the face of the principals which are enshrined in the law surrounding renting of property, namely ‘Peaceable Occupation’ that it is laughable. This is the one with the Landlord with a pair of binoculars. Worst than suggesting that either a Landlord would do such a thing, or that such behaviour is reasonable, is that the Tenant is shown hiding as if guilty! It is of course supposed to be a spoof, but not one that this Letting Agent sees the funny side of!
Small Print.
More important than the above which are at the best misleading, are the two real time cases that have affected Landlords of our own concerning their own Buildings Insurance cover. The first is the small print surrounding what a particular Insurance Company included insisted upon as acceptable by way of requirements for any Tenant. It was the first time we had come across this and we discovered purely because a member of our staff was very thorough in checking the Landlords documents, but in short, they insisted upon minimum earnings and hours of work per week. This opens a whole new area of concern for all Landlords, but at least we can advice all we speak to of the risk!
Reaction Time.
Secondly was a flood suffered during the recent cold spell, not by frozen pipes but by the failure of a valve. The damage, which happened between Tenants when the property was empty, also affected next door, but the reaction time in getting the property surveyed and starting to both dry out and repair, was in our opinion, the worst we have ever seen. It is difficult to know how to avoid this happening again, but I certainly feel that when looking at the cheaper end of Insurance cover, before a policy is taken with, shall we say an unusual supplier? Then ensure you have at least one reference, because we feel this Landlord has lost at least two months’ rent, which is more than the original cost of the Insurance!
Conclusion
Well the only one that springs to mind is that Insurance is a field that is going to continue to supply topics of conversation. Given the current FSA regulations, it is also one that fewer people can enter in to conversation about professionally, as we are not allowed to recommend Insurance providers ourselves, despite our daily involvement ‘in the field’. This is supposed to protect customers and ensure nobody gains financially from such advice. Perhaps the reality is that this is a short term view and that Companies in our position can actually help! But in my experience what cannot be denied is that the adverts cause more confusion than clarity.
Recent Comments