DELITE INSURANCE AGENCY 
© Delite Insurance Agency
DELITE INSURANCE AGENCY - FLAT INSURANCE SCANDAL
If you are a flat owner, you may be at risk of being ‘dually insured’ for your property. “Dual insurance occurs when a policy holder is paying for two types of cover when they only need one and can also apply when they have been sold cover for building for their individual flat”. Many of you may not realize that blocks of apartments or flats already come with building insurance and there is no need for owners of each flat to get a separate one. The building insurance is paid by owners as part of the service charge and therefore is already covered. “It is overly unnecessary and complicated if people are enticed to insure single flats because they don’t realise that they may already be covered”. Mr. Neil Cook of Delite Insurance Agency believes that 25% of flat owners are dual insured. He believes that this act is unethical and blames some direct writers such as banks for mis-selling these covers when they know it is not a necessity. “Lenders are not supposed to insist that you take out building insurance, but word their letters to make you think that you should”.
It is a common scenario which Mr. Neil Cook has recognized and is happy to help anyone who is facing similar problems. “Modern brokering is very computer focused. If the computer rejects the information, the policy is often rejected too” No one should allow lenders or policyholders to mislead you in paying for something you already have.
To learn more about the topic and the issues regarding it, please read the two articles:
DELITE IN THE PRESS
Flat owners at risk of having dual insurance OR WORSE!!!!
Flat owners may be individually insuring their property in a block of flats with some direct insurers; a move that one broker believes amounts to unethical practice.
Neil Cook, of independent intermediary Delite Insurance Agency, claimed that taking out individual building cover for a flat in a block was unethical and accused some direct writers of mis-selling cover.
He commented: "This leaves major issues about reinstatement, if there is a claim for example, and it is also not giving good advice. The public needs to be made aware of this and brokers should also be aware and use it as a tool to get back into the market."
Mr Cook became aware of the problem when managing the insurance for a client's premises: "I was surprised when he said his bank had persuaded him to take out building cover when he arranged his mortgage with them four years ago. This was despite living in a flat that was part of a block of eight.
"Lenders are not supposed to insist that you take out building insurance, but word their letters to make you think that you should."
Traditionally, a flat is insured as part of the block and often flat owners pay insurance as part of their service charge: "I have heard of cases of insurance being paid as part of the service charge and charged by the lender too," added Mr Cook. "It is overly unnecessary and complicated if people are enticed to insure single flats because they don't realise that they may already be covered. I would say that about 25% of flat owners are dual insured."
Ensuring insurance is right
TO secure a mortgage, borrowers must also ensure they have building insurance. But residents of flats and houses converted into apartments could be wrongly insured,.
PEOPLE living in blocks of flats or houses converted into more than one residential unit could have been mis-sold buildings insurance, according to a Kent broker.
Neil Cook of independent brokers Delite Insurance Agency, a member of British Insurers Brokers' Association (BIBA), has found many flat owners are dual insured and suspects many policyholders could have been misled.
Dual insurance occurs when a policy holder is paying for two types of cover when they only need one AND CAN ALSO APPLY WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN SOLD COVER FOR BUILDING OF THEIR INDIVIDUAL FLAT.
The reason this mostly affects flat owners is although blocks of residences can be classed as a single unit and can be covered with just one policy, insurers still offer individual policies for each individual flat.
Typically the freeholder will have a policy covering the whole building and this is usually included in the service charge.
As many as 10 per cent of the population could be affected and possibly more, according to Neil.
Neil explains: "I have been seeing clients with dual cover for around 10 years but up until recently it was only about one case per year. A client who lived in a block of eight flats came to me once and each unit had separate insurance.
"Also when my wife was in the process of remortgaging she was persuaded to take cover, when she already had it.
"Problems are also arising when a lender knows a building is insured - this will have been clarified before a mortgage was finalised - but still offers a borrower insurance. The crux is they are trying to take money when they don't have to.
"This can be confusing."
Eight separate policy holders may be paying between £200 and £300 a year but a freeholder's policy for the whole building may be proportionally half this amount "If the freeholder has not taken out an individual policy to cover the housing block, the first step is to approach them to see if this can be arranged.
"Failing that, residents should club together and form their own resident's association and take out a policy in the name of, for example, 123 The Avenue."
Neil says paying to form a limited company is not necessary, becoming an association will suffice and is free.
"This document must also prove the interest of the freeholder, acknowledging they own the freehold, as a note to whoever owns the property and the names of the lenders.
"This is to show the current insurable legal interest, as insurance is a condition of mortgage."
A key reason residents who do not club together encounter problems is because insurance company computers only recognise a single name for the policy and will not accept multiple names such as Mr Smith, Mrs Jones and Ms French.
Neil says unmarried couples commonly experience difficulty gaining joint policies because of this.
He said: "Modern brokering is very computer-focused. If the computer rejects the information, the policy is often rejected too.
"It is typically direct insurers who do not sell covers for blocks of flats but are happy to issue policies for individual units, as these systems are geared towards a single name. Mr/Mrs Smith for example, policies only."
It is a common scenario which Mr. Neil Cook has recognized and is happy to help anyone who is facing similar problems. “Modern brokering is very computer focused. If the computer rejects the information, the policy is often rejected too” No one should allow lenders or policyholders to mislead you in paying for something you already have.
To learn more about the topic and the issues regarding it, please read the two articles:
DELITE IN THE PRESS
Flat owners at risk of having dual insurance OR WORSE!!!!
Flat owners may be individually insuring their property in a block of flats with some direct insurers; a move that one broker believes amounts to unethical practice.
Neil Cook, of independent intermediary Delite Insurance Agency, claimed that taking out individual building cover for a flat in a block was unethical and accused some direct writers of mis-selling cover.
He commented: "This leaves major issues about reinstatement, if there is a claim for example, and it is also not giving good advice. The public needs to be made aware of this and brokers should also be aware and use it as a tool to get back into the market."
Mr Cook became aware of the problem when managing the insurance for a client's premises: "I was surprised when he said his bank had persuaded him to take out building cover when he arranged his mortgage with them four years ago. This was despite living in a flat that was part of a block of eight.
"Lenders are not supposed to insist that you take out building insurance, but word their letters to make you think that you should."
Traditionally, a flat is insured as part of the block and often flat owners pay insurance as part of their service charge: "I have heard of cases of insurance being paid as part of the service charge and charged by the lender too," added Mr Cook. "It is overly unnecessary and complicated if people are enticed to insure single flats because they don't realise that they may already be covered. I would say that about 25% of flat owners are dual insured."
Ensuring insurance is right
TO secure a mortgage, borrowers must also ensure they have building insurance. But residents of flats and houses converted into apartments could be wrongly insured,.
PEOPLE living in blocks of flats or houses converted into more than one residential unit could have been mis-sold buildings insurance, according to a Kent broker.
Neil Cook of independent brokers Delite Insurance Agency, a member of British Insurers Brokers' Association (BIBA), has found many flat owners are dual insured and suspects many policyholders could have been misled.
Dual insurance occurs when a policy holder is paying for two types of cover when they only need one AND CAN ALSO APPLY WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN SOLD COVER FOR BUILDING OF THEIR INDIVIDUAL FLAT.
The reason this mostly affects flat owners is although blocks of residences can be classed as a single unit and can be covered with just one policy, insurers still offer individual policies for each individual flat.
Typically the freeholder will have a policy covering the whole building and this is usually included in the service charge.
As many as 10 per cent of the population could be affected and possibly more, according to Neil.
Neil explains: "I have been seeing clients with dual cover for around 10 years but up until recently it was only about one case per year. A client who lived in a block of eight flats came to me once and each unit had separate insurance.
"Also when my wife was in the process of remortgaging she was persuaded to take cover, when she already had it.
"Problems are also arising when a lender knows a building is insured - this will have been clarified before a mortgage was finalised - but still offers a borrower insurance. The crux is they are trying to take money when they don't have to.
"This can be confusing."
Eight separate policy holders may be paying between £200 and £300 a year but a freeholder's policy for the whole building may be proportionally half this amount "If the freeholder has not taken out an individual policy to cover the housing block, the first step is to approach them to see if this can be arranged.
"Failing that, residents should club together and form their own resident's association and take out a policy in the name of, for example, 123 The Avenue."
Neil says paying to form a limited company is not necessary, becoming an association will suffice and is free.
"This document must also prove the interest of the freeholder, acknowledging they own the freehold, as a note to whoever owns the property and the names of the lenders.
"This is to show the current insurable legal interest, as insurance is a condition of mortgage."
A key reason residents who do not club together encounter problems is because insurance company computers only recognise a single name for the policy and will not accept multiple names such as Mr Smith, Mrs Jones and Ms French.
Neil says unmarried couples commonly experience difficulty gaining joint policies because of this.
He said: "Modern brokering is very computer-focused. If the computer rejects the information, the policy is often rejected too.
"It is typically direct insurers who do not sell covers for blocks of flats but are happy to issue policies for individual units, as these systems are geared towards a single name. Mr/Mrs Smith for example, policies only."
