Unoccupied house insurance

Roro999

Registered User
Messages
320
Who has best offers on this ? House purchased and will be applying for vacant homes grant. So until that's approved in about 3 months it will be unoccupied. Thanks.
 
Not much appetite for this cover, in the marketplace.

I was lucky to get Allianz to do one for me, and only got it through a broker, with limited protection in the event of fire, explosion, earthquake, lightening etc.
 
Its expensive enough. I needed a policy for an unoccupied house a couple of years ago and got one through Chill Insurance.
Euro860 for 1 year, limited cover.
 
Its expensive enough. I needed a policy for an unoccupied house a couple of years ago and got one through Chill Insurance.
Euro860 for 1 year, limited cover.
What???

How big was the house and where was it?

I'm paying less than half that, for a small detached bungalow, and feel I'm getting ripped off!
 
I have been told to get unoccupied house insurance once unoccupied for more than 30 days , the ESB and water must be disconnected or the policy would be invalid if anything happened. Also the house must be in good condition , ie doors, windows and roof. You would then wonder what's the point of getting it insured, bar a lightning strike ?
 
the ESB and water must be disconnected or the policy would be invalid if anything happened.
I had the same experience, most insurers had totally unrealistic conditions or only offered limited cover. Eventually got cover including public liability, fire and water without having to disconnect services with Arachas. Cost was around €850 which was at least double the standard insurance cost, and that was a few years ago.

The house was sold 6 months later and there was no problem getting a full rebate less a small administration fee for the remaining 6 months. Presumably with any insurer, Roro999 can cancel when he moves in, get a refund and take out much cheaper standard insurance.
 
Last edited:
I had the same experience, most insurers had totally unrealistic conditions or only offered limited cover. Eventually got cover including public liability, fire and water without having to disconnect services with Arachas. Cost was around €850 which was at least double the standard insurance cost, and that was a few years ago.

The house was sold 6 months later and there was no problem getting a full rebate less a small administration fee for the remaining 6 months. Presumably with any insurer, Roro999 can cancel when he moves in, get a refund and take out much cheaper standard insurance.
Arachas have quoted 860. Clause in policy says all water tanks and central heating system must be drained and stopcocks turned off at the mains. Fire etc., malicious damage.
 
Arachas have quoted 860. Clause in policy says all water tanks and central heating system must be drained and stopcocks turned off at the mains. Fire etc., malicious damage.
Fair enough, Arachas must be like the others now.

I was the executor, family from abroad would come home occasionally and stay in the house. I’m sure there are many in the same position. Having to have heating and water systems drained would not make that easy now.
 
What???

How big was the house and where was it?

I'm paying less than half that, for a small detached bungalow, and feel I'm getting ripped off!
It was an end-of-terrace 2-bed house (old 1930's Corporation-type) in Dublin 7. I got two quotes from different companies, for about the same amount. I only needed it for a year then sold the property, and also got a rebate due to the selling it before the insurance expiry date.
 
Last edited:
You would then wonder what's the point of getting it insured, bar a lightning strike ?
Very occasionally unoccupied houses are broken into and fittings & fixtures, including wiring are stolen. Then there are storms. public liability...
 
Once again, the insurance industry takes us for a ride :-(

I must disagree. An unoccupied property is a far greater risk than an occupied one. There's no one there in the event of something small going wrong, which can quickly progress to something major, like fire or burst pipes. Then you have the increased risk of burglary and vandalism and on top of all that, the burglar/vandal might be injured and might sue!

All insurers want to reduce their risk, not increase it. Given that the premiums of the many look after the misfortune of the few, the many might not take too kindly to their premiums increasing for sloppy underwriting!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leo
Thanks for replies. If I visit the house and it's not my PPR 4/5 times a week and stay in it one night a week is it still considered an unoccupied house for insurance purposes?
 
Thanks for replies. If I visit the house and it's not my PPR 4/5 times a week and stay in it one night a week is it still considered an unoccupied house for insurance purposes?
We recently bought a new home but won't move in fully until we've sold our PPR, meanwhile organising energy upgrades and we're there for a few hours almost daily.

I tried a couple of brokers first but they couldn't help.

Axa insure our PPR so I thought I might as well try them. The first agent said no - they didn't do unoccupied house insurance, and it was too close to home (10mins drive) for 'holiday home' insurance. Undeterred I rang again and the second agent got through to their underwriter in the UK, and after several back and forth's for further clarification, our new place was insured for €550, not that much more than our PPR. Contents insurance is €25k which is their minimum, which I can increase as required. No public liability so I check our workmen have their own.

I think I struck lucky, but you might too so keep trying.
 
Thanks for replies. If I visit the house and it's not my PPR 4/5 times a week and stay in it one night a week is it still considered an unoccupied house for insurance purposes?
Probably depends on each insurer's definition of "unoccupied" unless there is a common one that they all use.
 
Back
Top