# insurance on unoccupied house



## Hippic (25 Mar 2007)

My insurance company limits the number of days which I can leave my house unoccupied to 42 days. As I am now retired I have the option of planning extended holidays overseas for perhaps 60 day. Do insurance companies allow one to purchase cover for the extra days.
I have read previous correspondance in relation to unoccipied house insurance, but it does not seem to cover the idea of purchasing additional cover.


----------



## RS2K (25 Mar 2007)

It should be possible as cover is available for holiday homes which are unoccupied possibly for many months.


----------



## Hippic (25 Mar 2007)

Thanks RS2K, I will search around tomorrow. I am really looking for some arguments I can try with the company I am with currently.
I know some insurance companies allow the house to be unoccupied for up to 60 days however I do not want the bother of changing companies.


----------



## SeanA (26 Mar 2007)

It might be handy to note that most terms state 42 continuous days, you could just ask someone to sleep in the house over night for one night and then you don't get caught by their exclusion.


----------



## Hippic (26 Mar 2007)

Thanks for the response. I contacted my insurance company this morning and got what I think is a workable solution for my situation. While the general terms of the policy limit in relation to unoccupancy would remain at 42 days, ie. the policy would not be changed, they would consider sympathetically an application for extra days cover. While I did not pursue the matter I did gather that there would be no extra cost.
They did have queries about my alarm system, the key holders and arrangements I put in place to look after the house while we are absent.


----------



## gerflinn (22 Jul 2007)

I was considering spending up to 3 months abroad.

My insurance co. covers me for up to 60 consecutive days for any one trip. after that cover is only for damage from storm, fire and flood (not including flooding from domestic appliances).

My broker states that the co. will not extend this. I will check directly with the co. myself.

Broker also states that having somone stay even 1 night would break the no. of consecutive days. Surely this is not as good as a neighbour (key-holder) regularly checking the property? 

I would even consider paying an extra premium to extend full cover for an extra month or so.


----------



## gerflinn (24 Jul 2007)

Checked with insurance co. Over 60 days unoccupied cover will reduce to storm fire and flood - they do not extend full cover beyond that period.

They also state that "occupied" means in fact occupied by the regular residents e.g. owners and family who normally reside there. They do not accept a relation staying there for one night or so as "occupied".

They say, for example, if the sole occupant of a house dies the house is deemed unoccupied even if a family member stays there the odd night.

So beware!!


----------



## Hasslehoff (25 Jul 2007)

The devil is in the detail and for the most part insurers will offer you all sorts of cover and terms but the true test of any insurer arises when  you have to make a claim. So dont take anything for granted implied or otherwise , have it in writing, black, blue or red but make sure it is amended on the policy.


----------



## dee06 (25 Jul 2007)

Hibernian offer 60 days as the max unoccupied term.  

Holiday home policies (Allianz and Hickey, Clarke and Langan/Lloyds) do them and usually don't restrict re occupancy.  They do however usually state that after x number days unoccupancy that some covers are withdrawn (check policy booklet). Typically these covers are escape of oil or water, theft and malicious damage.


----------



## dee06 (25 Jul 2007)

Just to add re Hibernian that they also state in their Homechoice policy that after 60 days consecutive unoccupancy that some covers are withdrawn. 
I know the ones I mentioned above are in there (escape of oil or water, theft and malicious damage). There might be a few more very small ones. But you'll have the fire, flood and storm cover anyway regardless.


----------



## gerflinn (26 Jul 2007)

The problem here is that you are not then covered for loss or damage due to vandalism, for example - and this could amount to a considerable sum.

I suppose, if you were away for say 3 months over the winter, you could drain down the water system and turn off the water. Lot of bother on your return bleeding system etc on your return.

Or is this advisable anyway if away during winter? A neighbour had a burst pipe while away for only 1 week and it caused major damage. However they were covered by insurance.


----------

