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

House Insurance - travel for more than 30 days

  • 11-05-2022 7:12pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 2,432 ✭✭✭


    We have had a change of plan for holidays this Summer and will be gone more than 30 days - 34 to be exact. (Visit to my sister and family on way home).

    I phoned our Insurance Company to notify them. They have said that the Insurance will be Fire only for the entire duration we are gone.

    We did this previously a number of years ago (33 days) and there was no difficulty with full cover remaining when we notified the Insurance Company. Same Company. They said that as it was only a few days over the 30.

    Another sister offered previously to house-sit for part of the time so I said this to the Insurance company who then said that I must switch to Landlord Insurance as they would consider our house to be let even though she is clearly not a tenant.

    The house has a monitored alarm with 3 different people (incl sister) having keys.

    What do others do if leaving home for more than 30 days ?

    Is there anything to be done except having Fire only for the entire time?

    Also posted in Travel but think better suited here ?



Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,139 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    I think most people wouldn't notify the insurance company.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,432 ✭✭✭SusanC10


    We had a break-in in 2019 while on holidays. Insurance Company asked for proof of length of holiday (flights) when we notified them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,139 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    I understand that but having a family member house sitting as op suggested is fine. Very few people would notify their insurance company if the house wasn't unoccupied for more than 30 days. It's not unoccupied if family members are house sitting



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,432 ✭✭✭SusanC10


    Insurance Company won't accept house-sitting now. They are saying that we must now switch to Landlord Insurance if my sister is there as they consider the house either unoccupied (Fire only) or let (Landlord Insurance) if neither one of my Husband or I are not there for more than 30 days.

    Based on previous experience, I didn't think that this would be a problem obviously.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,139 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    I understand that. They won't accept house sitter because you changed your original story. They think you are making up the house sitting now to have full insurance.

    Just to be clear. You don't list all the family members that live in the house on your policy. It's not like car insurance. Your policy says unoccupied for 30 days. It doesn't state who can or can not stay in the house. Your sister could live with you for 2 weeks out of each month and you wouldn't need LL insurance.

    If your house isn't unoccupied for more than 30 days then you don't have to notify them.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,042 ✭✭✭✭Seve OB


    Maybe just switch your insurance company



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,998 ✭✭✭Eggs For Dinner


    Your insurer appears to be more stringent than most. Housesitters, even family members have the right to sue you as members of the public. Those that usually reside with you do not, hence the need for landlords insurance

    Most insurers just increase the excess or warrant it be visited every few days etc for a short period over the 30 days



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,432 ✭✭✭SusanC10


    So, what can we do now ? Just accept Fire only for the time period ?

    I phoned the insurance company thinking that it would be the same as a few years ago. When they said No, I asked if it would make any difference if my sister stayed there to house-sit and then they said that it would need to be Landlord Insurance. That either my Husband or I must be there with her for it not.

    Previously, they said that we had to turn off the water, alarm on, monitored and asked how close was the closest key-holder (neighbour) when we exceeded the 30 days. They also said accidental damage would not be covered for the duration.

    I had also understood that it was only periods over 30 days which wouldn't have full cover so the last 4 days but No it's all 34 days.



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,363 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    It's also not insured since you fail to meet the terms of the insurance contact, which defeats the purpose.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,998 ✭✭✭Eggs For Dinner


    You might have got someone who is not experienced. (there are too many creeping in to decision making roles these days). Politely ask to speak to a team leader and see if any reasonable conditions can be applied that are acceptable. Fire only is ridiculous



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,139 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    How do you fail to meet the terms of the contract when it isn't unoccupied for 30 days or more?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,432 ✭✭✭SusanC10


    Today on the phone they told me that it is not considered "occupied" as they consider that to mean owner-occupied meaning my Husband or I must be there.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,432 ✭✭✭SusanC10


    I am going to call again tomorrow and do as you have suggested.

    Really feel like we are being penalised for being honest with the Insurance Company.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,139 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    I have examined that to you already. Because you changed your story they don't believe you.

    The insurance company has no idea who lives in your home. They are not named on the policy

    You asked the question what would other people do. I answered most people wouldn't notify the insurance company if the house wasn't unoccupied for 30 days or over. You seem to have a bee in your bonnet with me for some reason. I answered the question you asked.

    Your best option is to call back the company and try again. As pointed out above you might have better luck with a different agent



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,432 ✭✭✭SusanC10


    I didn't "change my story". I was upfront with them. I told them that we would be away and asked for the same extension on the 30 days as we have had previously. When they said No, I asked them if it would make any difference to their decision to switch the policy to Fire only if my sister stayed in the house for part of the time which she had already prior to my phone call offered to do.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,139 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12




  • Registered Users Posts: 50 ✭✭Dollar Thief


    Insurance companies are scumbags.

    Post edited by Henry Ford III on


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,363 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    Because it is not owner occupied and the OP was informed that he needs a landlord policy in such a situation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,998 ✭✭✭Eggs For Dinner


    Standard uninformed answer. Insurance is about risk. Do you think a house unoccupied for over 30 days is the same as one where the occupants are in and out all day? I agree the response by this insurer is over the top, but most problems can be overcome



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,363 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    Mod Warning: If you cannot make a meaningful contribution without profanity DO NOT POST here.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,139 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Op needs to look up her policy I would think

    As suggested best option is to ring again and hope for a different agent



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,479 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    There's no point in 'shopping around' for an agent who gives you a satisfactory (what you want to hear) answer. Unless you get that answer in an official response via e-mail or (preferred) a hardcopy letter.

    But won't the insurance company be able to fall back on the policy as being the only game in town? That's their defence against reckless agents who give out info which is not in accordance with the policy conditions. My take on this is that if one agent says 'no', you can get 99 to say 'yes' and they will count for nothing. Because the fact that you get different answers shows that you can't trust what any of them are telling you.

    The reality is that the policy document rules, it doesn't matter what they tell you on the phone.



Advertisement