Tenant Had Small Fire In Kitchen - Insurance Excess

D

Donal112

Guest
Hi all, just looking for some advice.

I received a call from my tenants last night to say they had a chip-pan fire in the kitchen. Nightmare.

Thankfully, nobody was hurt and they managed to put it out without a huge amount of damage being done. But the fire brigade were called and a new cooker/presses needed and the ceiling to be painted/clean up, etc required.

I have spoken to the Managing Agents of the Housing Complex this morning as the buildings are covered under a block policy.

They advised that all of the repairs should be covered under the insurance and they would send an assessor out asap. BUT there is a €750 excess on the policy.

Is this something I can reasonably pass on to tenant? The fire was caused through carelessness - they left a chip pan on the hob and left the kitchen because the baby was crying.

Thanks for any advice.
 
This is what deposits are there for,this €750 should be paid by the tenant,no ifs buts or maybes.

I generally make no comment on these issues until the tenant is moving out,otherwise they are likely to gyp you on the last months rent.

Also tell them that from now on in chip pans are forbidden,they are way to dangerous to be used in apt complex's,they had a very lucky escape yesterday.
 
Donal112 said:
I received a call from my tenants last night to say they had a chip-pan fire in the kitchen. Nightmare.

Thankfully, nobody was hurt and they managed to put it out without a huge amount of damage being done. But the fire brigade were called and a new cooker/presses needed and the ceiling to be painted/clean up, etc required.
Click to expand...
Did you supply the tenants with a fire blanket in accordance with the ?

If not, and the tenants know their rights, you may be liable for the insurance excess yourself as you are required by law to provide a fire blanket for the kitchen. They could argue that due to the absence of the fire blanket, they were unable to tackle the fire in a timely manner in order to minimise the damage.
 
Donal112 said:
I have spoken to the Managing Agents of the Housing Complex this morning as the buildings are covered under a block policy.
Click to expand...

I would be surprised if your fixtures and fittings and internal painting was covered by the block policy - would they not come under your own contents? I thought the block policy only covered the common areas/external walls of the apartment. I am open to correction of course.

Second the comment on providing a fire blanket.
 
Mrs Vimes said:
I would be surprised if your fixtures and fittings and internal painting was covered by the block policy - would they not come under your own contents? I thought the block policy only covered the common areas/external walls of the apartment. I am open to correction of course.

Second the comment on providing a fire blanket.
Click to expand...

Contents would not include painting or kitchen units are these are integral parts of the building.

I would also doubt if you would be successful in claiming off the tenant for an accident. Hence the reason for insurance in the first place. I would think you would loose your tenant if you tried but you never know
 
kkelliher said:
Contents would not include painting or kitchen units are these are integral parts of the building.

I would also doubt if you would be successful in claiming off the tenant for an accident. Hence the reason for insurance in the first place. I would think you would loose your tenant if you tried but you never know
Click to expand...

A landlord is required by law to have insurance which covers damage to and loss of or destruction of the property. He is also required to have cover which indemnifies the landlord "to an amount of at least \250,000, the landlord against any liability on his or her part arising out of the ownership, possession and use of
the dwelling". This should be covered in any "landlord's insurance". Relying on block insurance may not cover that which is required by law.

Under the RTA 2004, a tenant that causes damage which also causes an increase in the premium is liable of the amount of the increase, as the premium falls due.

I would therefore contest that the tenant is liable to pay any excess that is required in the event of a claim.

If, as delgirl says, a fire blanket and fire extinguisher have not been provided, then the tenant would be able to prove breach od landlord's obligations. However, if the correct fire prevention equipment was available and in working order, the tenant should be liable for the excess or the repairs, which ever is the lowest.
 
Facetious I accept your expertise on a lot of the matters that you contribute to but I am confused by the first paragraph in your last post. Maybe it is me. I was always under the impression that when I made my contribution to the apartment block insurance via the management fee that fixtures and fittings were included in this and that there was no further obligation on the part of the landlord in relation to insurance. The tenants can obtain insurance for their contents if they so wish.
 
Dermot said:
Facetious I accept your expertise on a lot of the matters that you contribute to but I am confused by the first paragraph in your last post. Maybe it is me. I was always under the impression that when I made my contribution to the apartment block insurance via the management fee that fixtures and fittings were included in this and that there was no further obligation on the part of the landlord in relation to insurance. The tenants can obtain insurance for their contents if they so wish.
Click to expand...
Yes, tenants should obtain insurance for their contents and personal belongings.

However, in a furnished apartment there is also the landlord's property - furniture, fixtures and fittings, which might not not come under the block insurance (you should carefully read a copy of your insurance policy for the exact terms and conditions.

Where I currently live, our block insurance does cover contents, but only up to a max of 2,000 euros (and any claimant pays first 500 euros). At our last AGM, the problem of insurance came up as regards contents and the opinion was that our block insurance relating to owners' property was insufficient and many owners wanted to obtain their own or better terms than the block insurance provided. However, it does not cover landlord's indemnity for third party accidents as mentioned in my previous post (see RTA 2004).

Most block insurances are suitable for owner occupiers but may not cover the requirements for landlords as set out in the RTA 2004 under landlord's obligations, section 12 (c) (ii), as quoted in my previous post.

I am not an insurance expert but have expressed what I believe are the requirements for landlords.
 
Block insurance cover covers the building, which is what the management company owns. The owner is responsible for everything within the walls (unless caused by faults/defects/leaks within the structure of the overall building) and should have separate insurance to cover this.

In my understanding of our policy, none of the damage caused in this case would be covered.
 
shesells said:
Block insurance cover covers the building, which is what the management company owns. The owner is responsible for everything within the walls (
Click to expand...

As far as I understand it the block insurance also includes fixtures and fittings within the apt.
 
I don't see how that can be possible. You can only insure what you own. The management company does not own my kitchen cabinets, or kitchen appliances even though they were fitted when I bought the apartment, therefore they are not covered under block policy.
 
The management company does not own the building either. It just manages the apartment block. Have your restrictions been clearly communicated in writing to all the owners. I would have expected that fixtures and fittings would be covered. Will be contacting my management company in view of all this
 
Dermot said:
The management company does not own the building either. It just manages the apartment block. Have your restrictions been clearly communicated in writing to all the owners. I would have expected that fixtures and fittings would be covered. Will be contacting my management company in view of all this
Click to expand...

Actually the Management Company does own the building. The management company is the legal entity comprised of all owners in the building and owns all common structures and areas such as carparks, bin sheds, building and corridors within buildings.

The Management Company hire a Management Agent to look after the day to day running of the development.
 
shesells said:
I don't see how that can be possible. You can only insure what you own. The management company does not own my kitchen cabinets, or kitchen appliances even though they were fitted when I bought the apartment, therefore they are not covered under block policy.
Click to expand...

In insurance terms they actually do cover all fixed items. There is no way for you to cover it any otherwise as the sum insured would have to cover the entire building in the event of fire hence the reason for block policies.
 
facetious said:
A landlord is required by law to have insurance which covers damage to and loss of or destruction of the property. He is also required to have cover which indemnifies the landlord "to an amount of at least \250,000, the landlord against any liability on his or her part arising out of the ownership, possession and use of
the dwelling". This should be covered in any "landlord's insurance". Relying on block insurance may not cover that which is required by law.

Under the RTA 2004, a tenant that causes damage which also causes an increase in the premium is liable of the amount of the increase, as the premium falls due.

I would therefore contest that the tenant is liable to pay any excess that is required in the event of a claim.

If, as delgirl says, a fire blanket and fire extinguisher have not been provided, then the tenant would be able to prove breach od landlord's obligations. However, if the correct fire prevention equipment was available and in working order, the tenant should be liable for the excess or the repairs, which ever is the lowest.
Click to expand...

Not overly disagreeing with your post but i would welcome confirmation of where you believe it is written that a landlord is responsible for the actions of a tenant which in this case appear to be non neglegent. A landlord must insure for his liability as owner and also where he/she is the user. He is not required and cannot insure against liability as user if he/she is not the tenant. Most contents policies for tenants cover this liability.

We do not know in this instance if the tenant has insurance but if they dont as i stated previously it is unlikly it would be worth chasing unless you wish to loose the tenant
 
Update

Hi all

thanks for replies on this.

Firstly - just to confirm that correct fire regulations were followed. There was a fire extinguisher and a fire blanket provided in the kitchen.

Secondly - I have met with the insurance assessor. The hob, kitchen units that were damaged by the fire are covered under the block policy along with the required painting of walls, ceiling, etc.

The block policy obviously does not cover contents. I have a separate landlord liability/contents policy which I could claim for contents off. Thankfully there was no contents damage except a microwave owned by the tennants anyway and the curtains needing to be drycleaned, furniture in the kitchen needing a good clean.

I have spoken with the tennants about the excess and they have accepted it is their responsibility.

Just the hassle of trying to get it all sorted asap now. And yes, chip pans are now banned!
 
kkelliher said:
Not overly disagreeing with your post but i would welcome confirmation of where you believe it is written that a landlord is responsible for the actions of a tenant which in this case appear to be non neglegent. A landlord must insure for his liability as owner and also where he/she is the user. He is not required and cannot insure against liability as user if he/she is not the tenant. Most contents policies for tenants cover this liability.

We do not know in this instance if the tenant has insurance but if they dont as i stated previously it is unlikly it would be worth chasing unless you wish to loose the tenant
Click to expand...
I cannot find in my post where I said that.

However, in this case, I believe that the tenant was negligent in leaving a chip pan on the stove and going to tend a crying baby. Was this not negligence?
 
I had stated that I did not believe there would be a successful case against the tenant if the op had to chase them. In response to this post you quoted my post and stated that the Landlord was required by law to have insurance against any liability on his or her part arising out of the ownership, possession and use of
the dwelling. Therefore I have taken this to understand that you believe the landlord is responsible for the actions of the tenant.

You could argue it is negligent but your could also argue it is simply accidental. We dont hvae enogh information to confirm as to base a decision of what we know would have no strength of case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top