We were quite often asked questions of liability insurance tenants. The situation is typical, people have a shelter that is not currently used, or specifically purchased for transfer to the employment. In this case, almost all concerned to protect its property interests from possible illegal actions of tenants. Many people are trying to resolve this issue through an insurance contract. We tried to analyze a number of standard insurance products, both classical contract and "Express", and then came to the conclusion that the qualitative solution of this problem does not exist, although in a telephone mode, and some companies convinced us that their "Express" is a cover, Although the treaty, in our view, it was written back.
What options are offered
Owners can offer themselves to insure their property (including movable and finishing) and include the risk of "wrongful acts of third persons." Also offer a contract of liability insurance the lessee, where the beneficiary will be assigned to the apartment owner.
Offer to insure their property in classical insurance contract at its full market value from the inspection. In addition, to insure his property also can be used and the various "Express" - a program for this inspection to conduct is not necessary, but the insurer's liability will be limited to a certain amount, perhaps very far from the real market value of the property.
With regard to liability insurance, it is somewhat different product, which includes compensation for damage to third parties for damage to the insured (the lessee) in a certain limit. Typically, the insured amount (liability limit) under such contract does not exceed 200,000 hryvnia. This is an analogue of liability insurance of vehicle owners.
Why can refuse
Insurance rules three companies that we analyzed, provides for the refusal for the harm caused by intentional acts of the insured, his employees, agents, etc. The same situation is duplicated in the classical instruments in the "Express" - programs instead provides for the refusal to pay compensation for damage caused by the Insured or persons who are members of his family residing with him and / or lead with a joint household. It would seem that the Express would have to go through, but it has a link to the insurance rules. In this case, and "Express" - the programs, and classic products regulated by some insurance regulations. Consequently, all the grounds for refusal to pay compensation under insurance rules will apply to "Express" - program. Moreover, we analyzed all the contract "Express" - insurance included references to the rules.
With regard to contracts of liability insurance, there also does not cover damage caused by intentional acts of the insured (in our case - the tenant).
The essence of the problem
Controversial issues in the contracts the two. One of them - an expansive interpretation of the list of persons under contracts of insurance of property, intentional acts which are grounds for refusal to pay compensation. Ie tenant is completely covered by this contract clause, as it was in the apartment lawfully, and the owner voluntarily gave him room. Under insurance liability issue is not so perfect. Since there expressly provides denial of payment in case of damage resulting from intentional acts of the insured.
Another controversial issue related to compensation for damages related to the careless actions of the tenant. In this case, the reckless destruction or damage to property insurance regulations, it is understood on the basis of interpretation of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In the understanding of art. 196 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine reckless destruction or damage to property, for which there is criminal liability shall be recognized as actions resulting in serious bodily injury or death, that is the case with the usual practice of renting flats almost unreal.
Thus, we concluded the impossibility of acquisition of an effective insurance protection against damage caused as a result of damage to personal property and finishes in a room that is rented. Set out our position is controversial. They can discuss, but a similar debate is possible and insurance claims.
Insurance protection against tenants - a myth
Did you like the material?Subscribe to our newsletter