POST RTM Buildings Insurance

Hello,

I have a question whish affects me directly and may affect other users of this forum, particularly those pursuing RTM.

My neighbour and I have RTM we have subsequently taken out our own buildings insurance for our individual flats and in our own names.

Our former management company wrote to our RTM company (me and neighbour) asking us to provide copies of the buildings insurance with the landlord (the infamous) Sinclair Gardens Investments Kensington named as the insured.

This doesn’t seem right. As the landlord their interest in the land our properties are built on is inherently protected without naming them as the insured.

I rang LEASE, The Leasehold Advisory Service (0845 345 1993) and to be honest got some pretty weak advice, the person I spoke to told me to adhere to the terms of the lease and seemed to think that any building connected to another should be under one insurance policy ( so a row of terrace house all have one policy? – no). The lease has no specific statement covering insurance other than the landlord will provide it, the management company will collect the premiums, well as we have RTM and now control the buildings insurance this scenario is redundant.

• Does the landlord have any real groundings to make this insistence?
• Should we insure in our names or as one person advised under the management company name?

This is why I am now interested in buying the freehold!

Many thanks

John

John,

Thank you for your post. Yet another reason why I would advise people to acquire the freehold if they can, rather than simply opt for RTM. I appreciate that funding comes into play.

However, the freeholder will have some input into the running of the RTM company (I wonder if the freeholder has elected to become a member in the RTM Co yet?) and as such it is a good idea for you and your neighbour to cancel your existing insurance and obtain one insurance covering the building as a whole. From a practical perspective, this is also desirable, as, in the event of a claim, there is no overlap (and possible double-insurance) which could cause problems. You can also simply name the freeholder as an "interested party". Shouldn't cost you any more for this.

Additionally, the lease states the landlord must insure under one policy. To bring the position in line with the terms of the lease (given the RTM Co is now obligated to observe these terms), you ought to create one policy of insurance anyhow.

I agree, it is a little bit of hassle cancelling your existing policy and then creating a new one, but it is probably less hassle than you would perhaps otherwise get?

To summarise - get the insurance position sorted out now, send Sinclair a copy and move on...perhaps towards a FH Acquisition (which I can assist with incidentally).

Tom