serotoninsid
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,754
Hi. I took out a policy with a ins. co. last year that had this as a clause;
The premises is not rented, let or sub-let or used for business or commercial purposes except as a home office.
I live in the house - but I "rent" rooms in so far as they stay in MY home as guests (albeit paying guests)"under licence" rather than the existence under law of a tenancy agreement. The house is my Principal Primary Residence - I live there 365 days a year.
I interpreted this to mean either a FULL (and complete rental of the house) or a FULL and complete Sublet of the house. The statement above does not refer to any partial rental or the renting of rooms. Other Insurance brokers offer more clarity in this regard - and ask directly - are you renting out rooms in the house - in which case (when obtaining quotations, I always declare it).
Renewal falls due in a couple of weeks - so I went through the process of obtaining quotes. Went back to my current insurer and over the phone, I declared that while the house was not rented per se, I did rent rooms 'under license' as outlined above. This gave rise to a conversation to the effect that they deemed my current cover as not meeting the elibibiltiy requirements - and that they couldn't honour the quote they had given for a renewal.
I have subsequently moved on and renewed with another insurer - and i'm content with this (and the way in which it was dealt with). However, my current insurer is now making a big deal that there is an issue with my current policy.
Can anyone shed any light on the above - with particular emphasis on the clause in bold above - as its the interpretation of this that my house cover depends upon.
The premises is not rented, let or sub-let or used for business or commercial purposes except as a home office.
I live in the house - but I "rent" rooms in so far as they stay in MY home as guests (albeit paying guests)"under licence" rather than the existence under law of a tenancy agreement. The house is my Principal Primary Residence - I live there 365 days a year.
I interpreted this to mean either a FULL (and complete rental of the house) or a FULL and complete Sublet of the house. The statement above does not refer to any partial rental or the renting of rooms. Other Insurance brokers offer more clarity in this regard - and ask directly - are you renting out rooms in the house - in which case (when obtaining quotations, I always declare it).
Renewal falls due in a couple of weeks - so I went through the process of obtaining quotes. Went back to my current insurer and over the phone, I declared that while the house was not rented per se, I did rent rooms 'under license' as outlined above. This gave rise to a conversation to the effect that they deemed my current cover as not meeting the elibibiltiy requirements - and that they couldn't honour the quote they had given for a renewal.
I have subsequently moved on and renewed with another insurer - and i'm content with this (and the way in which it was dealt with). However, my current insurer is now making a big deal that there is an issue with my current policy.
Can anyone shed any light on the above - with particular emphasis on the clause in bold above - as its the interpretation of this that my house cover depends upon.