In this section
Offers for readers
Follow the news from interest
The comment stream
Recent comments
- 1 of 20764
- ››
Editors choice
- 1 of 294
- ››
Finance sector jobs
Reporting to the Senior Manager Operational Risk Effectiveness and Assurance, the key focu...more
New Zealand
Reporting to the Head of Finance - Retail and Business Bank the key focus of this role is ...more
New Zealand
This role in consultation with the Financial Controller provides financial, strategic and ...more
New Zealand
If you are motivated by the prospect of seeing the big picture, developing your team and m...more
New Zealand

The news stream
Latest news
Most commented
- 'Don't sell SOE shares; Borrow from Kiwis' 143
- Record exodus to Australia in last year 75
- 90 seconds at 9 am 43
- BNZ cuts most fixed mortgage rates 39
- 'Councils should look at asset sales' 34
- English wants more house builds 30
- Fonterra cuts payout forecast 29
- Budget tax moves to target high income NZers 26
- 90 seconds at 9 am: No G8 deal 20
- NZ to borrow more if crisis worsens-Key 19
Most viewed
Liability insurance for apartment owners well below amount needed
Over the last several years there's been a significant growth in apartment blocks.
Ten years ago it was a relatively rare feature of our property market. So much so that insurers appear not to have given them a lot of consideration.
If you now look at most of our major cities, the site of multi storey apartment blocks is very common. These take the form of single level strata units or multi-storied apartment buildings.
The insurance industry has failed to adapt to this change and therefore has policies for buildings and contents that are not safeguarding owners and/or occupiers for the financial risk they face.
Specifically it's the amount of liability insurance where the issue arises. Currently policies provides Owners liability of between $1m and $2m (see our data here) and Occupiers Liability under contents insurance is the same (contents summary data here).
By comparison, Australian insurers provide up to 20 times more liability protection than here. Over there policies generally provide liability insurance of $20m and occupier's liability under contents insurance is usually for a similar amount.
While the chance of a claim is rare, is still a real possibility. If through a single apartment occupiers negligence a fire starts, or a water overflows, in a multi apartment block, damage to other apartments in the complex is very likely. Claims for the damage to the building and contents would be added to by loss of rent, temporary accommodation and so on. You would likely find $1m or even $2m woefully insufficient.
Anybody who is living in this type of property needs to update the amount of liability insurance now.
Related Topics
Unfortunately the only way to achieve this is to approach your insurance company and ask them to increase your cover. The amount should be sufficient to not only protect you for damage to the building but for all related claims as well.
In most cases your insurer will probably need to do this by buying insurance protection for this as they would be unlikely to take a risk of this size without co-insuring it. As a one off this is usually done through a reinsurance arrangement known as facilitative insurance. Expect to be charged for this type of arrangement.
By far the best approach would be for companies to permanently review their capacity for this and provide automatically sufficient protection ($20m) as part of their standard policy offering.
This should have very little impact on premiums charged, as the facility spread over the market would have a negligible impact on pricing. This would seem to be the case as the Australian products provide substanially more liability cover and are still priced similar to New Zealand.
6 Comments
Thank for sharing,I like it
Thank for sharing,I like it
Liability policy amounts under apartment
Liability policy amounts under apartment owners etc. policies.
I would think the reason why the Aussies need $20 mio is far more to do with the fact that over there they are exposed to injury risks which are taken care of for us with the ACC provisions?
If an apartment owner/occupier can start a fire by leaving something on the stove on and burning down the whole complex it would be a bit surprising that increasing the cover to pay for this would have a neglible effect on pricing. Just divide one $20 mio payout by the number of apartments in NZ. Because someone just owning a standalone house won't need the extra cover therefore the exposure can not be spread across every policy.
@Bruce: a multi-apartment can easly
@Bruce: a multi-apartment can easly be worth $10~20million. If your cooker catches fire and burns the lot down...In terms f spreading the risk its sort of covered to me in that everyone with this type of home shares the risk...equally...
It is interesting that it is not covered though.
If a claim is made on you....and its 20million....there is no chance of it ever being [re-]paid....
Curious here, so what happens? they declare you bankrupt and you pay back $x for 60 years?
Even without interest, that's $6300 a week...like its so happening.
hmm another point can they chase you across borders? ie pack your bags and move to OZ? (or say Canada?)
In some ways crazy, but once you have nothing to lose.....
regards
@Bruce: Actually in some ways
@Bruce: Actually in some ways $1million is possibly not enough, given some houses now are around that value on their own. So its reasonable to assume that a house on either side of you and actually maybe behind (given how they get squashed in) would come to $3M+....so if your house catches fire and then up go the neighbours...which technically I suppose could carry on down the street....taken to extreme....
The thing is, the insurance
The thing is, the insurance companies are already taking the risk - through the property policy of the building (or apartment) owner and by the fact (as Steven) points out that there is zero chance of recovery against the actual fire-starter.
Therefore, across all apartment insurance policies (property as well as contents), there should be no need for an overall rise in premiums. Not that that makes any difference!
So its reasonable to assume
So its reasonable to assume that a house on either side of you and actually maybe behind (given how they get squashed in) would come to $3M+....so if your house catches fire and then up go the neighbours...which technically I suppose could carry on down the street....taken to extreme....
nike shoes
ugg boots