The lease says, "Tenant must have insurance policies providing at least $100,000 property insurance and $300,000 liability insurance to protect Tenant, Tenant's property, and Tenant's guests who may be injured while on the property."
Do they mean 100k for personal property insurance? I'm not sure how they could require that much when my belongings don't add up to that much.
When I asked him about it, he said:
100K covers "personal property" loss if there was some event in the building (fire, Major water leak not caused by you but "others", etc. ). My insurance DOES NOT provide any coverage for any loss of your personal property.
It also covers damage caused by you or your guests to property that exceeds the Security Deposit. Example: You turn off the heat in winter and go away for a week; water pipes in apartment freeze and burst, causing water damage in your apartment and the apartment below yours. That would be a situation resulting in a claim to your insurance carrier for all repair costs.
The General Liability typically covers "injury claims ". Example: Your Guest trips on stairs or anywhere on property. They could file a claim for costs associated with the injury treatment. This would fall under your policy.
In both of these examples I would also most probably be brought into the "claim issues" and as such my insurance would "sort it out". However my insurance carrier requires that all tenants carry their own insurance.
Any thoughts on this? Thank you for your help!
Landlord requesting 100k for “property insurance” and 300k for liability insurance.
byu/GeneralCastor inInsurance
Posted by GeneralCastor
4 Comments
If you turn off the heat in winter and the pipes freeze and burst your personal insurance is not going to cover any of the damage. Because it’s gross negligence on your part.
If the heater didn’t work because of a maintenance issue on the other hand your landlord would be on the hook with their insurance. Your insurance would cover your personal property and subrogate the landlords insurance or the landlord themself.
I don’t know if you’re going to be able to get 100k of property insurance either way, because anything past 75k typically requires underwriting which means proof that you have 100k worth of property.
So, good luck with this train wreck.
Weird the landlord requires personal property coverage. I have never seen that before. Why would they care about your personal property being covered.
Most that require you have renters insurance only require $100k for liability. Nothing wrong with increasing to $300k though. Usually very cheap to do so.
Makes no sense. I would try to negotiate with the landlord and explain that there’s no use going over those limits. Maybe it’s a financial reason for them; maybe they want renters with good insurance in hopes that they’ll attract wealthier tenants is the only thing i can think of.
Strange I never rented a place that required personal property insurance, that really has nothing to do with them, and I highly doubt if you’re renting you would even have 100k worth of personal property that could be damaged.
Might want to connect with them and get clarification on that.