Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Insurance - Two vacant properties, one plot

  • 19-02-2021 9:26am
    #1
    FionnK86
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,214 ✭✭✭


    Myself & family .purchased two properties (needing refurbishment), in 2017. Mother has been insuring property up to this point as one house, as they share same lot.

    Shouldn't they be insured as 2 separate houses for true cover, my thinking is if one burned down the assessor wouldn't ask which one did you insure? :o


Comments

  • #2
    3DataModem
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,077 ✭✭✭3DataModem


    If you are under-insured the best you can hope for in the event of a claim is that your claim is reduced by the % of the cover. Example: if you have 100k of contents, and you insure for only 50k, and you lose 10k worth in a fire. You don't get 10k, you get 5k because you only insured 'half' the value.

    Another consideration is that you need vacant building insurance, not house insurance, if they are unoccupied.

    I know I have not answered OPs question, but the general rule is that if you think you might not be insured, you are probably not insured. "Insuring as one house" doesn't mean anything, as your mother would have had to declare dimensions, room numbers, etc on the insurance form.


  • #3
    FionnK86
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,214 ✭✭✭FionnK86


    3DataModem wrote: »
    If you are under-insured the best you can hope for in the event of a claim is that your claim is reduced by the % of the cover. Example: if you have 100k of contents, and you insure for only 50k, and you lose 10k worth in a fire. You don't get 10k, you get 5k because you only insured 'half' the value.

    Another consideration is that you need vacant building insurance, not house insurance, if they are unoccupied.

    I know I have not answered OPs question, but the general rule is that if you think you might not be insured, you are probably not insured. "Insuring as one house" doesn't mean anything, as your mother would have had to declare dimensions, room numbers, etc on the insurance form.

    Good afternoon 3DataModem,

    Thanks for prompt response to the OP. :D

    Yes, I approached OP with this in mind, that generally if there's a danger it's not insured it's best assuming it's not! I remember that from Junior cert. business alright, that if you insure for less you get less paid out, or if you insure for more you pay higher premium.

    I believe it's insured as vacant, are vacant houses quoted higher than occupied?

    That's a fair point that I missed regarding dims., I'd say current insurers have our policy doc. with that stated somewhere. I shall get digging!


Advertisement