Refused House Insurance Again

Z

zurgno1

Registered User
Messages
14
A few months ago I couldn't insure a house as it was going through probate as no names was on the deeds , the insurance company at the time said that there has to be names on the deeds and that is why they could not insure the house comeback when you have the names finalized on Deeds so today they were finalized.
The house is now in 4 siblings names and after a bit of one moment, they refused me even though I told them what they had told me they then changed there tune and to every question I queried I got a barage to every answer was the Underwriters , Underwriters issue,

Absolute Joke even when I tried to complain to ombudsman , Financial and Pension insurance etc they sent me around in circles,
Anyone ever have this issue and can Institutions do what they want ?
 
zurgno1 said:
A few months ago I couldn't insure a house as it was going through probate as no names was on the deeds
Click to expand...
This situation is usually handled by having the property in the name of "the representatives of [the name of the decedent]".

One of the responsibilities of the executor/reps of a decedent is to protect the assets of the estate. If real property cannot be insured how can reps achieve their responsibility?

Have you tried more than one insurance company/broker? It sounds to me like the company you've been dealing with just doesn't want your business.
 
Exactly I was only doing what they said to do and wait, I will try others it just seems so wrong that insurance companies can do what they want, all I’m trying to do is insure the house , no wonder people don’t bother insuring
 
zurgno1 said:
no wonder people don’t bother insuring
Click to expand...
I doubt that that's the case generally. I'm sure that it's by far the exception rather than the rule for people not to insure their property.
zurgno1 said:
the insurance company
Click to expand...
As @mathepac suggests above, no matter what this insurer has been telling you, you most likely need to try more than a single insurer and maybe even try a broker or two if cover elsewhere also proves difficult. I doubt that this is a unique case (multiple/more than two owners named on the deeds).
 
zurgno1 said:
So Insurance Companies can refuse you if they want,
Judge Jury Executioner So.
Is that the Accepted Rule,
Click to expand...
Of course they can, it's a business after all and they have no legal or commercial obligation to enter into any contract.

There could be other reasons why they refused you, is the house in a flood prone area or town for example.

Go to a local broker and if there is no valid reason for refusing you insurance, they'll sort it out
 
zurgno1 said:
So Insurance Companies can refuse you if they want,
Click to expand...
ClubMan said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
But, it has to be said, they normally don't. They make their money by sellling insurance policies, after all, not by declining to sell policies. So if they refuse cover there is a reason. "Underwriting issue", as mentioned in the OP, usually means there is some reason for thinking that the risk is bad. Leo asks if the house is unoccupied; insurers are reluctant to write cover for vacant properties since they are at high risk of damage or degradation.

The OP doesn't say what reason the insurers gave for refusing cover. It helps to know this because, once you understand why you are having difficulty getting cover, you may be in a position to do something about it — e.g. if the problem is that the property is vacant, perhaps a family member can move in, or perhaps you can get someone in as a tenant or a caretaker.

Peanuts20's advice to go to a broker is sound. If you can't identify the reason for refusal of cover the broker will probably be able to do so very quickly.
 
No two siblings living there , no floods or anything risk like at all I’ll get a broker thanks fir advice just never do business with them again won’t be insuring 5h3 car next year fir sure
 
For reference, as @mathepac suggested, the most straightforward way to ensure the property remains insured during probate is to deal with the current insurer and have the insured name changed to "the reps of the late xxx". If the property is unoccupied the insurer will usually restrict cover, deleting theft, water/storm damage etc and may go further and restrict cover to FLEA perils only (Fire, Lightning, Explosion and Aircraft impact), or even go so far as limiting cover to "Fire only".

As others have suggested you would be best to talk to a broker. The "one size fits all" policies that the direct arms of the main insurers offer are fine for the majority, but aren't geared to handle risks that vary from the norm. There are underwriters who will look at non-standard risks no matter how unusual and a good broker will have access to these, as well as having an understanding of the criteria which the main insurers apply.

You could also call to the local office of one of the mainstream general insurers (e.g. AXA, FBD - there aren't many companies with sales offices remaining) as its often easier to talk to someone in person.

Good luck with getting it resolve.
 
How long was property uninsured? That can cause problems as issues could have arisen during the period where there was no cover in place.

I don't understand how there were 'no names on the deeds'. The property had to have been registered at some stage. As many have previously said, the norm is to insure in the name of the 'reps of the late xxx'.
 
When someone passes away the property is in there name and then when property goes in to probate it’s then there are no names on the deeds till probate is sorted which in this case took over 6 months, so that’s why they didn’t insure, then when I get it sorted they don’t want more than 2 people on the deeds ,
 
zurgno1 said:
When someone passes away the property is in there name and then when property goes in to probate it’s then there are no names on the deeds till probate is sorted which in this case took over 6 months
Click to expand...
Sounds like the executor/rep fell down on the job here.

I had no difficulty registering properties in exec/reps names having contacted the insurers as soon as possible with death cert, the status of the property occupied/unoccupied, copies of pages naming me as executor/rep, etc. All they want is to be kept in the loop, most of the time.

With car insurance, I could tell some different stories, like when Subaru renamed their Turbo 2000 model Imprezas to WRXs ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top