UK Landlord Forum / Life

What are peoples experiences with Landlord insurance in terms of any damage that a tennant has performed on the property?

What is considered reasonable wear and tear and what is damage?

I.e. if a tennant clumsily watered a house plant for a few years and soaked and therefore rotted the floor boards and required you to replace the floor boards - would that be covered typically?


Should a tennant fall behind with rent, or in any other serious manner breach the terms of the letting agreement, to what extend does insurance usually cover these costs?

I know others on here will agree when I say such policies are a total waste of money. I was talked into it by my first lettings agent (who was on a nice commission) When I was faced with a tenant who disappeared just before the court got involved,the policy did not cover my legal costs,the rent  arrears (due to some timing clause) or the horrible malicious damage.No way would you get the money for the damaged floorboard. You would be better doing your utmost to get a reliable tenant,and making sure you have some cash reserves.       

I would have to agree with Heavykarma. It's an insurance and they will always do their utmost to avoid paying out for a start. In practice, estate agents still insisted on there being a a Landlord Insurance in place when my property was last listed. They did not try to sell me a policy. Regular inspections should eliminate the most obvious potential problems but I know agents simply do not conduct thorough enough inspections.