Home Too good to be true? Home insurance cheaper with contents cover?

[tiredout]

My 91 year old mother's home insurance was up for renewal so I rang the company. No policy cover details came with the renewal form.

Contents cover seemed to have disappeared from her policy since her original policy with Shield which was absorbed by Eagle Star and then Zurich.

Anyhow, I asked for contents (25k) to be included on her policy and was told that the premium was less than for buildings only. Is this true?

Also, when I said not to bother with accidental damage cover on the contents, the contact in Zurich asked me twice whether to go ahead and cancel the accidental damage cover on the buildings. Is it common not to have accidental damage cover on buildings?

 

[oldnick]

Never heard of a policy that charges less for building and contents than just for building. Maybe they've got some weird speciaL deal on at present.
Best thing is to check around with brokers and online.

And always get accidental damage cover for building cover. One may accidentally not turn heater off, let sink overflow, leave window open etc etc.

 

[hfp]

If the insurance was just auto-renewing every year, you'll probably find your mother has been over-paying. A renewal quote is rarely the best available price.

Most years when I get my renewal quote the company tries to increase my premium by up to as much as 25%, but by shopping round I can normally pay less than the previous year, or at the very least keep the premium the same.

By asking them to amend details of the policy they'll have likely done a brand new quotation, rather than just bumping up the price year on year.

 

[Thirsty]

One may accidentally ...., let sink overflow

That would be water damage then surely & would be covered under a normal policy. I don't know that accidental damage for buildings is necessary.

Accidental damage to contents makes sense if there are children & pets around, so if insurance is cheaper without it & there are only adults in the house, I'd drop it.

There has been a tendency over the years to add more and more useless insurances to home policies and up the premium accordingly. I think we pay for far more than we really need.

 

[kkelliher]

That would be water damage then surely & would be covered under a normal policy. QUOTE]

no

escape of water is the standard cover and that only covers water leaking from a fixed water source in the property ie pipe, radiator, boiler, tank etc. water overflowing a sink is not escape from a fixed water source.