Hi All, Just wanting to start a discussion on insurance, I am sure many have many and varied policies, anyway, I have a bit of a method in my madness, and have sometimes used insurers who are sold by whom holds the mortgage, only because I think they are more likely to look after my interests if they will be looking after their own as well, anyway, obviously it will depend on what is in the PDS. As many will know, it can be complicated, and you can be in various predicaments and insurance may not be helpful. So I thought it would be good to discuss the Building, Contents & the landlord income tenant side. I generally have read the PDS from each insurance, but I am coming to the conclusion that we may need 2 policies. And as experienced by some, the PDS alone is not to be relied on, no good if everything is promised but not much delivered when things go pear shaped. These questions are complex, because you may place more importance on say protecting income v the building, or you may be the other way around, or both may be vitally important. Personally, I am not thinking of carrying 2 policies, one that is strong and known reliable for building, and one for landlord and contents, however my combo they basically cross over, but strengths are in opposite areas. So who do you use and why ? Have you found one place that covers everything sufficiently ?
No insurer covers absolutely everything, there are always exclusions. Which exclusions have you found to be problematic?
Have always used ebm, their main exclusion is flood cover but don't have any properties in areas where this would be a problem. I like their price, customer service, claims process, level of cover.
For me, first, exclusions or inclusions are not what I consider, I consider who will and who may not honor claims and in a reasonable manner and time frame. Then I look at features. Basically, from my point of view, I need to cover as many bases as possible at this time, where as some others I know only need to worry about a specific area or do not care at all apart from basic building and liability. I hope to learn from others too, so am not putting my cards on the table so I am not driving the conversation, or wanting to at this point at least. So throwing back to you and others, who do you like and why ? do you read all the PDS documents and look objectively at problems people have with claims ?
Good reason to consider an insurer D.T. in regard to flood, I started to look closely at a lot of the insurers, as most towns and cities have dams, rivers, creeks, watercourses etc, all water events may be required.
I do not read all the PDS. Why not share you knowledge? The forum is like Christmas which is about giving. If you give your insight you will have a better response rate.
I suppose the response rate may reveal what people feel, or know, or care maybe about such insurance. There is a few issues, that I outlined, and one of the main things will be how does a company perform when you actually need them, for instance, no good if PDS looks great and covers everything, but when making a claim, every trick in the book is used to avoid responsibility & in this regard, I have no real world experience. With housing insurance, and the potential outcome if you have a decent mortgage, I would have thought this would be a hot topic, but maybe, like me, without actual experience during claims for significant events, there is not much to say or share, probably only seen a handful that have had major loss and having to rely on insurer. My only insight, is that none seem to cover everything well, so some people may feel better with 2 policies, one to cover the less serious rental loss etc & one that is stronger on building, this is what I am considering. Also, I find that with life being so busy, sometimes you think you are covered for xyz but if you read, or check your policy, sometimes you find otherwise, and that be for varying reasons, so it is good to review your insurances and see if you feel comfortable from time to time.
I posted this in another thread....worthwhile placing here for future forum users... ------------- If ever there was a case for due diligence this is it... The Territory Insurance Office (TIO) was the state backed insurance company for the nt. It worked by everyone in the NT paying pretty much the same premium. The people in the centre would essentially subsidise the people in the Darwin/Katherine flood zones. This allowed for development in areas that probably should not have been developed. Last year TIO was privatised. The new owners have moved to a per property model. Now people who are high and dry are getting a slight reduction in insurance. People who bought in the flood zones are getting quotes of up to 10k per annum... Territory Insurance Office (TIO) defends premium price hikes following on from privatisation - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) Anyone thinking of investing in the NT will need to consider this....
