Warning – no insurance cover on damage if property not let quickly?Make Text Bigger
I’ve not been able to find an article on this in the forums.
I have a few properties and I’ve unfortunately had to claim on one or two insurance policies in the past, usually for malicious damage done to them. I’ve just had one of the properties vandalised whilst trying to find a tenant for it.
The assessor has said that as the property has been “unoccupied” for over 30 days, the claim is rejected! For a landlord, I would think that it’s not unusual for a property to be vacant for 30 days or more – whether whilst doing renovations or simply whilst finding new tenants.
I’ve read on the insurance ombudsman’s site (http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/34/unoccupied_properties-34.htm ) that “unoccupied” is a vague term, which unless the policy gives a clear definition, it is possible that “the person who has legal title to a property may be regarded as the “occupier” even if they never live in the property and it is empty”, so the rejection of my claim may be unfair.
Anyone have any experience of making such a claim? Does anyone know of an insurer who offers more appropriate insurance cover for landlords whose properties don’t always have new tenants within 30 days of the previous ones leaving?
Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.