Hi Wonderful People!
So, first investment property set to be tenanted on the 15th of this month, need to get me some landlord insurance.. ideally a policy which will include pets (haven’t found one yet).
So I’ve scoured a few different PDSs (mission critical) and some companies will include things which others will not etc etc. All the reviews on each company are all terrible and disaster stories of companies not paying out after big damage bills etc
I own a 3 bedroom property and am looking to insure for house and contents (landlord), the tenants have two dogs as my place has a yard, we agreed that for the rent price it was a fair trade. So my question is, what are people using?
Smaller insurance resellers like EBM have very strict clauses (naturally being cheaper) about what they will and wont pay out on given every tiny circumstance, so maybe it’s best to stick with a larger company. Sure you may pay more, but less arguments at claim time? What do you think?
Hi Matt,
Certainly this is NOT one of the areas in which I feel I am competent to comment – but hey, maybe some of my thoughts might be of use – to you, or to others who find this topic in years to come.The one and only link that I figure could be of use to you is this one:-
https://www.propertyinvesting.com/the-12-most-common-pitfalls-when-insuring-your-rental-property/The post was from an Insurance “master” and in it, he warns of several things that we should all be wary of. Now, I don’t know Brett, except that he was knowledgeable enough to produce what you just read. And, as he is an Insurance Broker, and you are looking for an answer to an Insurance problem, perhaps Brett can be part of the answer? His contact details are at the end of the article.
The only other thought that I wanted to share was this – there are some events we simply MUST be insured for, while other events may be simply a “maybe”. Depending on the likelihood of any damage, and the severity of same, versus the cost of covering it, it could be that some events can be “self-insured”.
One of those COULD be the tenant’s dogs. If you already know the tenant and their past tenure, could it be that the tenant and dogs have lived there for some years with little damage to the property over that time? Indeed, many tenants with dogs are so happy to find a landlord who will accept them, that they bend over backward to be a model tenant. I was fortunate to have such a tenant for over 12 years, complete with a pair of dogs who were NO trouble over that time. Neither was the tenant – ever !!
And no – I never did endeavour to find Insurance to cover pet damage.
Benny
Hi Matt
I just came across this post and was somewhat intrigued. The reference to having “very strict clauses” compared to major insurers is in my opinion way off the mark, and in fact very much the opposite way around. The specialist landlord policies such as RentCover are renowned for covering a far greater breadth of landlord risks than those of the direct insurers, which are often very limited.
I have written many many times regarding more detail on this throughout forums etc.
On another note, in regard to pet damage, RentCover in fact includes up to $65,000 for damage by pets. RentCover is used by more than 120,000 landlords and is one of the leading protections in Australia, having been around now for more than 26 years.
If you would like more detail in regard to any of this please let me know.
Regards
Brettbclarke
Email MeI was fortunate to have such a tenant for over 12 years, complete with a pair of dogs who were NO trouble over that time. Neither was the tenant – ever !!
And no – I never did endeavour to find Insurance to cover pet damage.I guess at the time of writing, I was (and still am) a novice when it comes to experience in the landlord game and was trying to cover all my bases. When in reality, the real world doesn’t work like that and was probably trying to find something which didn’t exist and meet my expectations 100%. I’ll probably end up being in the same boat as you Benny and having minimal to issues with the pet situation.
On another note, in regard to pet damage, RentCover in fact includes up to $65,000 for damage by pets.
Hi Brett, as mentioned above, at the time I was hoping insurance policies would basically do anything I needed it to do, which is certainly not realistic. You’ll be pleased to know I went with RentCover at the premium level for that statistic you mentioned.
Because after reading countless PDSs, EBM still came out on top in terms of fairness and coverage a broad range of events under different circumstances. I guess the end game for insurance is that as landlords we never have to use it, however it is a necessary evil and believe I made the right decision in the end.
Appreciate both your contributions.
Good one, Matt !!
Benny
I agree RentCover has been the best Landlord Insurance out of all the ones that I have had. Never going back to the banks for insurance for this kind of income / tenant protection again
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
