Strange home insurance quote

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Friends just bought a nice home in TV from a couple who are moving into assisted living.

They were getting insurance quotes and one company offered them a $1,300 discount if they rented their home out occasionally. .

WTF?

[Stu from NYC]

Insurance thought that in the event of a flood somebody on the premises could take steps to minimize damage? All i can think of.

[villagetinker]

Friends just bought a nice home in TV from a couple who are moving into assisted living.

They were getting insurance quotes and one company offered them a $1,300 discount if they rented their home out occasionally. .

WTF?

IMHO, this only makes sense if the insurance company thought the home was going to be empty for an extended period, if the new owners are moving in right away this makes no sense at all.

[margaretmattson]

Doesn't make sense. If a renter (or anyone for that matter) gets injured in the home, the insurance would pay for it. There is also a chance a renter may steal something from your property or perhaps even vandalize it. It would seem if you told an insurance company you plan to rent your residence, the rate would go up because of an anticipated risk. In today's market, I would guess some insurance companies would not write a policy at all. Too high of a risk!

I think because the home would no longer be a residence but now a business, you would have to purchase a type of insurance that covers businesses and business loss. Landlord insurance? Homeowners insurance would not cover a rental business.

[Papa_lecki]

I’m actually surprised insurance companies don’t set up homewatch services in places like the villages, where places are empty for periods of time.

[retiredguy123]

It may be that the OP's friends didn't get the whole reasoning from the insurance company. Typically, insurance companies charge a standard rate for an owner-occupied house. They charge a higher rate for a house that is always rented, the landlord rate. They also charge a higher rate for a vacant house, when it is not occupied for several months. Apparently, there are some snowbirds who are not paying the appropriate insurance rate, because they should be charged for the vacant house rate.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

IMHO, this only makes sense if the insurance company thought the home was going to be empty for an extended period, if the new owners are moving in right away this makes no sense at all.

Only answer which makes sense, along with Retiredguy. All the others, meh . .

BTW, the insurance on my unoccupied mom's house in MA is normal because the company said "the furniture is still there, fully furnished" which makes no sense whatsoevah. But maybe i am not tracking the premiums closely enough.

However, I had that discussion TOTV already . .

Thanks VT

[Blueblaze]

Are you kidding? It makes all kinds of sense! I just can't believe someone has finally discovered an insurance company that
has figured it out!

GIVE! WHAT'S THE NAME?

Think about it -- this insurance company has finally figured out that the Villages is not a ramshackle suburb of Miami where an unoccupied house falls apart.

In fact, a seasonal rental in the Villages is the most risk-free property to insure possible -- particularly if some previous owner has already scammed his previous idiot insurance company out of a new roof!

Think of it -- you're talking about a property that is built to 110 mph hurricane standards, 80 miles from the ocean. In fact, it's probably built from concrete blocks with steel studs! The entire development is a giant flood-control project, with retention ponds that can be pumped to move flood water around as necessary! Regardless of location, every home is less than 5 minutes from a fire station. There is a constant neighborhood watch to prevent theft, and to guarantee that the property cannot become an eyesore. Children -- the source of most crime and mischief -- are not even allowed. The house will be surrounded by old people, who are home all of the time and see everything that goes on in their neighborhood. Chances are, the owner even lives less than 15 minutes away and inspects the property regularly, himself. He probably even has a monitored fire and security alarm system.

And on top of all that, this house will only be exposed to the risks of occupancy -- cooking fires and plumbing disasters -- for four months out of the year!

I actually own a 1200 sqft Courtyard Villa seasonal rental exactly like that. And it costs me $2000/year for insurance THAT DOESN'T EVEN COVER THE ROOF! That's TWICE what my 2000 sqft home in Texas cost to insure, way out in the country, 20 minutes from any fire station and 80 miles from the ocean, and not built to any hurricane standard whatsoever!

Wow, an insurance company has finally pulled their head out! NAMES! WE NEED A NAME!

[Blueblaze]

I’m actually surprised insurance companies don’t set up homewatch services in places like the villages, where places are empty for periods of time.

Why would they do that, when the development already does that for free?

My question is, why is there no insurance company that already knows that?

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Are you kidding? It makes all kinds of sense! I just can't believe someone has finally discovered an insurance company that
has figured it out!

GIVE! WHAT'S THE NAME?

Think about it -- this insurance company has finally figured out that the Villages is not a ramshackle suburb of Miami where an unoccupied house falls apart.

In fact, a seasonal rental in the Villages is the most risk-free property to insure possible -- particularly if some previous owner has already scammed his previous idiot insurance company out of a new roof!

Think of it -- you're talking about a property that is built to 110 mph hurricane standards, 80 miles from the ocean. In fact, it's probably built from concrete blocks with steel studs! The entire development is a giant flood-control project, with retention ponds that can be pumped to move flood water around as necessary! Regardless of location, every home is less than 5 minutes from a fire station. There is a constant neighborhood watch to prevent theft, and to guarantee that the property cannot become an eyesore. Children -- the source of most crime and mischief -- are not even allowed. The house will be surrounded by old people, who are home all of the time and see everything that goes on in their neighborhood. Chances are, the owner even lives less than 15 minutes away and inspects the property regularly, himself. He probably even has a monitored fire and security alarm system.

And on top of all that, this house will only be exposed to the risks of occupancy -- cooking fires and plumbing disasters -- for four months out of the year!

I actually own a 1200 sqft Courtyard Villa seasonal rental exactly like that. And it costs me $2000/year for insurance THAT DOESN'T EVEN COVER THE ROOF! That's TWICE what my 2000 sqft home in Texas cost to insure, way out in the country, 20 minutes from any fire station and 80 miles from the ocean, and not built to any hurricane standard whatsoever!

Wow, an insurance company has finally pulled their head out! NAMES! WE NEED A NAME!

histrionic typing issue?

[Blueblaze]

histrionic typing issue?

No just a histrionic Florida Insurance issue!

A guy just reported that he found a NON-crooked insurance company! That's news!

Why isn't everyone begging to hear the name? Do you LIKE forking over your retirement savings to some crook so he can use it to subsidize idiots who live on the beach, or the other idiots who use their "full replacement policy" to steal a roof every time a hailstorm blows by?

Yeah, you're right. On this subject I'm real HISTRIONIC! And you should be to!

[margaretmattson]

Wasn't the concept of the OP that if you rent your home part-time you get a discounted premium? I understand your frustration about high premiums, but the OP was asking why would there be a $1300 premium deduction if you rent your home. I think perhaps this is why you are being teased. Your response is not about the post.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Yeah, you're right. On this subject I'm real HISTRIONIC! And you should be to!


working towards a mute/block/ignore

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Wasn't the concept of the OP that if you rent your home part-time you get a discounted premium? I understand your frustration about high premiums, but the OP was asking why would there be a $1300 premium deduction if you rent your home. I think perhaps this is why you are being teased. Your response is not about the post.

however you read it, its your brain. . not mine

[JGVillages]

Friends just bought a nice home in TV from a couple who are moving into assisted living.

They were getting insurance quotes and one company offered them a $1,300 discount if they rented their home out occasionally. .

WTF?

$1300 off of what price and for what size home? Full quote may be way high without details.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

$1300 off of what price and for what size home? Full quote may be way high without details.

read all the replies, I got the best answer already
in post #3 and #6 from VT and RG123

as acknowledged in post #7

satisfied guy

[margaretmattson]

read all the replies, I got the best answer already
in posts #3 and #6 from VT and RG123

as acknowledged in post #7

satisfied guy Sorry to disagree but a home can be struck by lightning, a tornado, hurricanes, etc even if a home is unoccupied for a while. Vacancy has nothing to do with an insurance policy. It is about who is occupying the home.

I believe the reason for the $1300 discount is that the homeowner is living in the home part-time. Homeowners insurance only covers personal loss. When the owner leases the home, the policy will no longer be valid.

During the time the home is leased to a renter, you will need to obtain insurance that covers a business property. Each year, you would have to purchase two policies- homeowners for the personal use of the home, business insurance for the business use of the home. If you have the wrong policy, your claim will be denied.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Sorry to disagree but a home can be struck by lightning, a tornado, hurricanes, etc even if a home is unoccupied for a while. Vacancy has nothing to do with an insurance policy. It is about who is occupying the home.

I believe the reason for the $1300 discount is that the homeowner is living in the home part-time. Homeowners insurance only covers personal loss. When the owner leases the home, the policy will no longer be valid.

During the time the home is leased to a renter, you will need to obtain insurance that covers a business property. Each year, you would have to purchase two policies- homeowners for the personal use of the home, business insurance for the business use of the home. If you have the wrong policy, your claim will be denied.

read all the replies, I got the best answer already
in post #3 and #6 from VT and RG123
as acknowledged in post #7

It's not my house as stated, and couldn't care less about how our friends manage their house expenses nor insurances.

but please keep explaining how insurances work in case others have never bought it before.

satisfied guy

[Blueblaze]

Wasn't the concept of the OP that if you rent your home part-time you get a discounted premium? I understand your frustration about high premiums, but the OP was asking why would there be a $1300 premium deduction if you rent your home. I think perhaps this is why you are being teased. Your response is not about the post.

EXACTLY.

Wade though that previous "histrionic" post of mine, if you don't understand why any sane, non-crooked insurance company who understands The Villages ought to jump at the chance to discount a house in the Villages that's vacant most of the time. I listed the reasons. The first insurance company that figures this out will run the rest of those crooks out of business!

The question isn't "why" it's WHO? WHO IS THIS HONEST INSURANCE COMPANY? WE NEED A NAME!

The fact that the OP hasn't responded with that name tells me the guy isn't serious. Instead, he called me "histrionic" and threatened to block me -- for giving him a dozen reasons for that quote and asking for a name.

That's not someone asking a serious question. That's just someone stirring the pot.