Keith Bowman
Member
- Messages
- 422
- Location
- Bottom left hand corner of Suffolk
Flyfisher said:
They should have asked Eddie Grundy - he'd have turned the tree into firewood, sold it, and patched up the wall for a pint of Shires and a few hundred quid
They should have asked Eddie Grundy - he'd have turned the tree into firewood, sold it, and patched up the wall for a pint of Shires and a few hundred quid
skier-hughes
Member
- Messages
- 3,414
- Location
- Staffs, UK
Flyfisher said:
Slightly more idea I agree with
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,168
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
Quick update to my previous statement about hearing good things about Ecclesiastical for period property insurance. Our insurance is due for renewal shortly and our NFU policy premium has increased by a tad over 1%, which seems reasonable - especially as the cover limits have also increased slightly. Nevertheless, I thought I'd check out some alternative and since I'd previously mentioned Ecclesiastical I started with them. Very pleasant and easy to deal with but even for a rough outline of the cover required they were almost twice as much as NFU - and that was before I mentioned things like outbuildings etc. A particular issue seemed to be not being within 10 minutes of a full-time fire station (it's 8 miles away), so perhaps they loaded us for that reason?
Pennyviz
Member
- Messages
- 233
- Location
- Wick, BS30
I've got Axa through Adrian Flux. Haven't claimed - so can't say what they are like, but cheaper than NFU.
Penny
Penny
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,168
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
Another quick update after a long call to John Lewis 'specialist' insurance dept . . . within £50 of NFU's renewal price. Think I'll be sticking with NFU for another year.
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,168
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
.
livias
Member
- Messages
- 426
- Location
- North east Bedfordshire
Conservation Officer can insist on rebuild using same materials and techniques. And will do. However I always wondered how my last old house would be rebuilt using the same materials as it was an elm timber frame
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,168
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
'Can insist', yes, but 'and will do' surely depends on the specific circumstances?
Would there really be much point in building a modern replica of a totally destroyed historic building? Perhaps if the building was truly unique, but the majority of listed properties, especially G2, are not unique, merely old, and 'old' cannot be rebuilt.
I suspect the worst case is for a listed period property to be only half destroyed, in which case a 'repair' rebuild would likely be required and this, depending on the original construction, is likely to be more expensive than an equivalent replacement new build, hence the issue of rebuild values for insurance purposes.
Would there really be much point in building a modern replica of a totally destroyed historic building? Perhaps if the building was truly unique, but the majority of listed properties, especially G2, are not unique, merely old, and 'old' cannot be rebuilt.
I suspect the worst case is for a listed period property to be only half destroyed, in which case a 'repair' rebuild would likely be required and this, depending on the original construction, is likely to be more expensive than an equivalent replacement new build, hence the issue of rebuild values for insurance purposes.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Right, so I finally signed on the dotted line for our Buildings and contents insurance....
If you go to money supermarket dot com and select Specialist insurance you get to go through their home protect insurance broker who specifically ask you if the house is listed and what grade it is listed to.
So I put in a rebuild value of £300k (house valued at £380k market value) so my best guess at a rebuild cost.
The policy covers rebuilding up to £600k ! (why they asked me I've no idea).
To cover some of the other points I should add that sure a partial rebuild could cost more than a total rebuild mainly because the cost of traditional materials and renovation would be more expensive than building a new house, the latter being possible since in that circumstance all best are off with regard to what the Conservation Officer has to say on the subject.
So I accept a partial rebuild would be more costly. Since my house is made from those oblong shaped red things (bricks I think they're called (that'll never catch on!) and some lime mortar I can't see a rebuild costing more than £600k, if it did, then the possibility of the rest of the house having another accident will increase significantly !!
The problem with insurance and the purveyors of said insurance is they trade on fear..."what would happen if..." and I'm glad to see this is alive and well in this topic... Our hope is always that something won't happen and the only test is when it does, thankfullly period properties are built by people who knew what they were doing, they'd never build a roof on top of a thatched roof and only secure it at the front..... oh wait...
My last insurer wouldn't guarantee cover when we had contractors working on the roof which I thought at the time was pretty crap, my new insurer doesn't say they don't though I've not read all the small print (waiting for my electron microscope to arrive so I can).
Sure as eggs are eggs, no matter how much you pay for your insurance, if you dare to claim on it, you can guarantee they will bitch and moan about it and you'll have to fight to get anything from them... that's just insurance generally in my experience.
For the record I managed to secure listed building insurnace with compulsary excesses of £100, no voluntary excesses a £600k rebuild, £8k outbuildings (we have a brick shed), £30k contents cover (new for old as opposed to old for old) all for £380.00 a saving of over £200.
I've never had to claim on my buildings insurance in any house so fingers crossed that'll stay the case with this one.
Paul.
If you go to money supermarket dot com and select Specialist insurance you get to go through their home protect insurance broker who specifically ask you if the house is listed and what grade it is listed to.
So I put in a rebuild value of £300k (house valued at £380k market value) so my best guess at a rebuild cost.
The policy covers rebuilding up to £600k ! (why they asked me I've no idea).
To cover some of the other points I should add that sure a partial rebuild could cost more than a total rebuild mainly because the cost of traditional materials and renovation would be more expensive than building a new house, the latter being possible since in that circumstance all best are off with regard to what the Conservation Officer has to say on the subject.
So I accept a partial rebuild would be more costly. Since my house is made from those oblong shaped red things (bricks I think they're called (that'll never catch on!
) and some lime mortar I can't see a rebuild costing more than £600k, if it did, then the possibility of the rest of the house having another accident will increase significantly !! The problem with insurance and the purveyors of said insurance is they trade on fear..."what would happen if..." and I'm glad to see this is alive and well in this topic... Our hope is always that something won't happen and the only test is when it does, thankfullly period properties are built by people who knew what they were doing, they'd never build a roof on top of a thatched roof and only secure it at the front..... oh wait...
My last insurer wouldn't guarantee cover when we had contractors working on the roof which I thought at the time was pretty crap, my new insurer doesn't say they don't though I've not read all the small print (waiting for my electron microscope to arrive so I can).
Sure as eggs are eggs, no matter how much you pay for your insurance, if you dare to claim on it, you can guarantee they will bitch and moan about it and you'll have to fight to get anything from them... that's just insurance generally in my experience.
For the record I managed to secure listed building insurnace with compulsary excesses of £100, no voluntary excesses a £600k rebuild, £8k outbuildings (we have a brick shed), £30k contents cover (new for old as opposed to old for old
) all for £380.00 a saving of over £200.I've never had to claim on my buildings insurance in any house so fingers crossed that'll stay the case with this one.
Paul.
Cloudscape
Member
- Messages
- 473
- Location
- Mid-Wales
My updated premium through Lark (after being with them for 9 years, with no claims) is £785. This is for a Grade II, stone and slate house, with £610k rebuilding costs.
This year, the government has upped the tax by 12 percent, plus there's another 3.9 percent to help cover people who live in areas with high flooding risk (ie, not me!). :roll:
Some interesting things have been said in this thread. If my house was wiped out, you couldn't replace it as a historic building. At best, it would be a fake, and modern building regs would probably be brought to bear?
One problem I have with Lark is that they make assumptions about your lifestyle. I have a crappy car. My tv has a SCART socket. I'm covered for all kinds of things I don't have (multiple bicycles) and not covered for things I DO have - old furniture and things I collect (which are irreplaceable). I think £68k+ contents is slightly crazy.
The only thing about Lark is... they don't nag you about door and window locks. Another insurer wanted ALL chimneys swept FOUR times a year (regardless of whether they had been used or not). That would have probably doubled the annual outlay.
But it's that time of year again. My renewal is due and I feel like I'm lining myself up to get mugged.
This year, the government has upped the tax by 12 percent, plus there's another 3.9 percent to help cover people who live in areas with high flooding risk (ie, not me!). :roll:
Some interesting things have been said in this thread. If my house was wiped out, you couldn't replace it as a historic building. At best, it would be a fake, and modern building regs would probably be brought to bear?
One problem I have with Lark is that they make assumptions about your lifestyle. I have a crappy car. My tv has a SCART socket. I'm covered for all kinds of things I don't have (multiple bicycles) and not covered for things I DO have - old furniture and things I collect (which are irreplaceable). I think £68k+ contents is slightly crazy.
The only thing about Lark is... they don't nag you about door and window locks. Another insurer wanted ALL chimneys swept FOUR times a year (regardless of whether they had been used or not). That would have probably doubled the annual outlay.
But it's that time of year again.
My renewal is due and I feel like I'm lining myself up to get mugged. Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,168
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
I feel your pain . . . and share it at my renewal time.
88v8
Member
- Messages
- 3,131
- Location
- Glorious Gloucs
Our premium - thatched, woodburners, not much on the way of locks, has gone up to £1150, that's a 15% increase. £600,000 plus £30,000 Contents.
In 42 years we've never claimed for anything of any nature. I'm in two minds whether to bother with insurance at all.
The only reason I'm likely to carry on is that if/when we sell, if there's no insurance in force that will something else for solicitors to make a fuss about.
Ivor
In 42 years we've never claimed for anything of any nature. I'm in two minds whether to bother with insurance at all.
The only reason I'm likely to carry on is that if/when we sell, if there's no insurance in force that will something else for solicitors to make a fuss about.
Ivor
If I could I would buy "catastrophe insurance" - so covers fire, flood, asteroid strike and alien abduction. Or insurance with a 5,000 excess or similar, but no-one seems to do that.
I have no interest in claiming for accidental damage, minor theft, bikes, basically anything below £5000 would cost me more over the next 5 years if I claimed on it. And any minor damage I would either repair myself, or would want to use a known person to repair. I can't quite afford to have no insurance , but I really want insurance that I would only claim on in event of a disaster.
I had to go through the comedy routine of drilling holes in my oak sash windows and replacing the security mechanism so that I could have "key operated locks". So what I had to remove was bolt that you manually screwed in that physically screwed the two halves of the sash together - the only way you would get in is smash the window.
What I installed was a small metal post that screwed in with a "key" that doesn't actually screw into the back of the frame, it only goes into a small recess - so now if you push the sash it will flex enough to put the post out of the recess and you can get in silently. But it's key operated* so the insurance company are happy..
Not a listed building, but I'm on a flood plain** so insurance is impossible to get and you have to dance to the tune of the insurer.
-Steve
*Actually it's not even a key, it's like an allen key, but it's described as a "key" on the packet so now I have "key operated locks"
**This always causes extra fun. Does any part of your property ever flood. Yes, of course, it's on a flood plain - the clue is in the name.But I am rural, I have a large garden which floods as it is part of the flood plain. The house is built on higher ground and has been there for ~250 years. I wonder if I could split my property into 2 separate titles and get rid of this nonsense..
The other question "are you aware of any flooding in your neighbours properties". Yes, the neighbours house floods. It's about 3 yards below mine, is the old forge and was build directly straddling the drainage ditch so that they could extract water from it for the forge, and as such every few years the water comes up literally from under the floorboards.
I have no interest in claiming for accidental damage, minor theft, bikes, basically anything below £5000 would cost me more over the next 5 years if I claimed on it. And any minor damage I would either repair myself, or would want to use a known person to repair. I can't quite afford to have no insurance , but I really want insurance that I would only claim on in event of a disaster.
I had to go through the comedy routine of drilling holes in my oak sash windows and replacing the security mechanism so that I could have "key operated locks". So what I had to remove was bolt that you manually screwed in that physically screwed the two halves of the sash together - the only way you would get in is smash the window.
What I installed was a small metal post that screwed in with a "key" that doesn't actually screw into the back of the frame, it only goes into a small recess - so now if you push the sash it will flex enough to put the post out of the recess and you can get in silently. But it's key operated* so the insurance company are happy..
Not a listed building, but I'm on a flood plain** so insurance is impossible to get and you have to dance to the tune of the insurer.
-Steve
*Actually it's not even a key, it's like an allen key, but it's described as a "key" on the packet so now I have "key operated locks"
**This always causes extra fun. Does any part of your property ever flood. Yes, of course, it's on a flood plain - the clue is in the name.But I am rural, I have a large garden which floods as it is part of the flood plain. The house is built on higher ground and has been there for ~250 years. I wonder if I could split my property into 2 separate titles and get rid of this nonsense..
The other question "are you aware of any flooding in your neighbours properties". Yes, the neighbours house floods. It's about 3 yards below mine, is the old forge and was build directly straddling the drainage ditch so that they could extract water from it for the forge, and as such every few years the water comes up literally from under the floorboards.
Cloudscape said:
Well, I'm going to sound like a broken record now, but Grade 2 listed, five bedroom, tiled roof, over 50% of walls made of brick (and the rest oak-framed), and I've got £1,000,000 cover for a £365 premium from LV=
LV= have also now been awarded the Which? 2017 Insurance Provider of the year.
I have no connection with LV= other than being a customer.
88v8
Member
- Messages
- 3,131
- Location
- Glorious Gloucs
Me! said:
I have a cracked copy of Body & Soul. Doesn't stop me playing it.
Me! said:
Alas, no thatch cover. Heyho.
Thatch. A rich man's roof.
Ivor
Cloudscape
Member
- Messages
- 473
- Location
- Mid-Wales
Me! said:
I hear you.
I'm going to give them a call tomorrow. Thanks for the info.Cloudscape
Member
- Messages
- 473
- Location
- Mid-Wales
Thank you very much, Me!
My updated premium through Lark (after being with them for 9 years, with no claims) is £785. This is for a Grade II, stone and slate house, with £610k rebuilding costs.
I've just arranged my next year's insurance with LV= for £200.85.
I left it a week after the initial quote, because I needed time to pick myself off the floor. :shock:
So... thanks very much, forum people.
My updated premium through Lark (after being with them for 9 years, with no claims) is £785. This is for a Grade II, stone and slate house, with £610k rebuilding costs.
I've just arranged my next year's insurance with LV= for £200.85.
I left it a week after the initial quote, because I needed time to pick myself off the floor. :shock:
So... thanks very much, forum people.
CliffordPope
Member
- Messages
- 982
A few years ago I had an interesting talk with an insurance assessor on the subject of partial damage and rebuilding costs.
He said if a part of a wall collapsed then they would have to cost in the total for replacement stone, even though in practice most of the rubble would be reusable. That's because insurance always assumes the costs of carting away and buying new materials. Then they would rebuild in the traditional way, with facing stones, through-stones, and rubble/earth infill.
But if a wall totally collapsed they would use breeze blocks on the inside and stone facing. So a full collapse of a wall could be cheaper than a partial.
He conceded that if they applied the rules strictly then the total has to be the sum of the parts, but in practice they use a half-way compromise between sum-of-the-parts and full (new) rebuild.
He also pointed out that you can deliberately exclude things you don't care about, as long as they are clearly specified. So a rickety outbuilding does not have to be insured at all. Also if you either don't mind your house flooding, or have confidence that it can't flood even though theoretically on a flood plain or close to a watercourse, then you don't have to include flood cover.
He said if a part of a wall collapsed then they would have to cost in the total for replacement stone, even though in practice most of the rubble would be reusable. That's because insurance always assumes the costs of carting away and buying new materials. Then they would rebuild in the traditional way, with facing stones, through-stones, and rubble/earth infill.
But if a wall totally collapsed they would use breeze blocks on the inside and stone facing. So a full collapse of a wall could be cheaper than a partial.
He conceded that if they applied the rules strictly then the total has to be the sum of the parts, but in practice they use a half-way compromise between sum-of-the-parts and full (new) rebuild.
He also pointed out that you can deliberately exclude things you don't care about, as long as they are clearly specified. So a rickety outbuilding does not have to be insured at all. Also if you either don't mind your house flooding, or have confidence that it can't flood even though theoretically on a flood plain or close to a watercourse, then you don't have to include flood cover.
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,168
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
That all makes sense. I've often thought it odd when I've heard that people couldn't get insurance cover because their house was near a river or similar, even though they were high enough that they would never flood in practice and thought to myself why not simply exclude flood damage from the policy. However, I think it would need to be carefully worded so as not to exclude all forms of water damage, for example 'flood damage' from a broken water main on higher ground that might drain through a house on the way to the river!
Having said that, I suspect that most home insurance policies are 'pre-packaged' ones with typical limits and exclusions that would be adequate for, say, 80% of all properties and can be sold from a telesales price list 'script', but once outside of being 'typical', eg thatched roof, non-brick construction, etc, it requires someone to answer questions, make decisions, perhaps refer back to the underwriters and all of that pushes up the price.
I very much liked stevebb's post about 'disaster insurance' and, like him, would be quite prepared to effectively self-insure for anything below say £5k or perhaps more, especially since my annual premium is now into 4 figures and in 34 years of house ownership I have only made two claims for accidental damage totalling a little under £3k. No wonder they call insurance a 'distress purchase'.
Having said that, I suspect that most home insurance policies are 'pre-packaged' ones with typical limits and exclusions that would be adequate for, say, 80% of all properties and can be sold from a telesales price list 'script', but once outside of being 'typical', eg thatched roof, non-brick construction, etc, it requires someone to answer questions, make decisions, perhaps refer back to the underwriters and all of that pushes up the price.
I very much liked stevebb's post about 'disaster insurance' and, like him, would be quite prepared to effectively self-insure for anything below say £5k or perhaps more, especially since my annual premium is now into 4 figures and in 34 years of house ownership I have only made two claims for accidental damage totalling a little under £3k. No wonder they call insurance a 'distress purchase'.