 |
|
| UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
| Reply |
|
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How to calculate property value for buildings insurance?
I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance
based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. MM |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
"MM" wrote in message =
... I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! =20 As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. =20 MM This should help http://www.abi.org.uk/Public/Consume...uildingcalcul= ator.asp |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:35:00 +0100, MM wrote:
I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! These people employ actuaries. Actuaries are people who found accountancy too exciting. Insurance companies are basically the white collar version of a bookies and operate in similar ways - looking at odds and form, laying off bets and so on. So they look at what the others are doing as well as applying their own rules. As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. You could ask the developer.... Normally the exercise would be part of a lender's survey, so you could also ask prospective neighbours what their buildings insurance is. ..andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"MM" wrote
| As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, | how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I | believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less | than the price paid for the property. In theory it would be the market price of the property less the cost of the land (plot value). However if the property has been built to a better than average standard (which would not be fully reflected in market price), rebuilding costs will be somewhat higher. Also, market price does not take into account the costs of eg alternative housing for you during reconstruction. Unless you expect rebuilding costs to be significantly higher than normal or you have a very cheap house on a valuable plot, then advising the insurer of current market value should be reasonably close. Owain |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
MM wrote:
I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. MM the rebuild insurance is double the purchase price, ime. others may disagree, insurance companies dont.... RT |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:45:29 GMT, "R Taylor"
wrote: MM wrote: I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. MM the rebuild insurance is double the purchase price, ime. others may disagree, insurance companies dont.... The other way around, surely. How can the rebuild cost exceed the cost of the existing building plus the land? The land doesn't go away...... ..andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:45:29 GMT, "R Taylor"
wrote: MM wrote: I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. MM the rebuild insurance is double the purchase price, ime. At least I know that that is completely wrong. The rebuild cost is *far* lower than the open market value. MM |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Andy Hall writes: The other way around, surely. How can the rebuild cost exceed the cost of the existing building plus the land? What you pay for a house really has very little to do with the cost of the land and the cost of building a house, and much more to do with what the market will bear in that area for x bedrooms, y reception rooms, and z bathrooms. The land doesn't go away...... Rebuilding cost of an end-of-terrace 1895 house was nearly double the market value. You couldn't just stick a modern Barratt rabbit hutch up there if it burned down. You would have to build a terraced property to join on and reasonably well blend in to the rest (doesn't need to be a perfect match), but to current building standards. -- Andrew Gabriel |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
MM wrote in
: I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. MM ....from standard tables he http://www.bcis.co.uk/costass.html |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
MM wrote:
I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. MM Normally its rebuild after total destruction cots, which is probably in the region of 100-150 a sq ft, for insurance purposes, tho in reality it can be a lot less.. |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:57:21 +0100, Andy Hall wrote:
On 29 Oct 2004 21:31:51 GMT, (Andrew Gabriel) wrote: In article , Andy Hall writes: The other way around, surely. How can the rebuild cost exceed the cost of the existing building plus the land? What you pay for a house really has very little to do with the cost of the land and the cost of building a house, and much more to do with what the market will bear in that area for x bedrooms, y reception rooms, and z bathrooms. The land doesn't go away...... Rebuilding cost of an end-of-terrace 1895 house was nearly double the market value. You couldn't just stick a modern Barratt rabbit hutch up there if it burned down. You would have to build a terraced property to join on and reasonably well blend in to the rest (doesn't need to be a perfect match), but to current building standards. Agreed, but this is a brand new house...... Why would anyone insure their house for other than its market value, less the value of the cleared land? Why would anyone want to rebuild anyway, and why should anyone expect a brand new rebuilt house to replace, say, a 100 year old Victorian one? If your house gets bombed to the ground surely you would do the same as if your car was written off - just collect the market value from the insurance company, walk away and buy a similar one with the dosh. Then sell off the old land to developer who will put 3 modern boxes on it. I suppose there could be a case for insuring for the full market value if the insurers would deem it a 'write-off' and deal with the land clearance/re-sale issues themselves. I haven't seen any statistics but it seems to me that the chances of a complete domestic gutting must be pretty small compared to the millions of properties paying yearly premiums. Phil The uk.d-i-y FAQ is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk/ Remove NOSPAM from address to email me |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
"MM" wrote in message ... I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. As well as the ABI guide already suggested you could look at http://www.bcis.co.uk/costass.html on which the ABI is based on. Your library may be able to get the book or you could blag online access at a college or uni. Looked into this when renewing my insurance recently. Many companies will fill in a value based on the house details. If you accept their valuation you are usually covered whatever the actual costs. Egg had the closest to the ABI figure but still higher. Norwich Union were usually close but not for older houses. Esure who like to think they offer the lowest premiums had a ridulously high suggested value resulting in a higher premium. Accepting a reasonable suggested valauation is still cheaper than employing a valuer who if you are lucky will just use the book anyway.... Jim A |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Jim Alexander" wrote in message
... "MM" wrote in message ... As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. Looked into this when renewing my insurance recently. Many companies will fill in a value based on the house details. If you accept their valuation you are usually covered whatever the actual costs. Egg had the closest to the ABI figure but still higher. Norwich Union were usually close but not for older houses. Esure who like to think they offer the lowest premiums had a ridulously high suggested value resulting in a higher premium. My buildings insurance is with the AA (which, unlike contents insurance or car insurance IME) is an excellent deal - but also, significantly for this thread, they aren't interested in the market or reinstatement value at all; they simply ask you for postcode, no of bedrooms etc, and you're covered for full reinstatement cost (they don't bother with giving you a figure). I recommend the OP at least gives them a go. David |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
In message , Mark
wrote R Taylor om typed: MM wrote: I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code the rebuild insurance is double the purchase price, ime. others may disagree, insurance companies dont.... LOL Undoubtedly for a House in Stoke, could even be treble. But do you think this would also apply to a similar house in London. ? Isn't it the land that costs the money in London and not necessarily the property build on it? -- Alan |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article , Andy Hall writes: The other way around, surely. How can the rebuild cost exceed the cost of the existing building plus the land? What you pay for a house really has very little to do with the cost of the land and the cost of building a house, and much more to do with what the market will bear in that area for x bedrooms, y reception rooms, and z bathrooms. The land doesn't go away...... Rebuilding cost of an end-of-terrace 1895 house was nearly double the market value. You couldn't just stick a modern Barratt rabbit hutch up there if it burned down. You would have to build a terraced property to join on and reasonably well blend in to the rest (doesn't need to be a perfect match), but to current building standards. Rebuilding my house has cost about half of what its current market value is. YMMV. When a family friends house burnt down, the shell and land went for the original house cost. The newer rebuild was infinitely better than the old house and commanded a little under twice the price. |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Alan wrote:
In message , Mark wrote R Taylor om typed: MM wrote: I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code the rebuild insurance is double the purchase price, ime. others may disagree, insurance companies dont.... LOL Undoubtedly for a House in Stoke, could even be treble. But do you think this would also apply to a similar house in London. ? Isn't it the land that costs the money in London and not necessarily the property build on it? Yes. Curiously enough, I am in the throes of selling my mothers house - a new build in 1953. There are no deeds to the house, only the land, and planning permission to build. It seems that when you sell a house, you actually sell the freehold to the land, and whatever is fixed upon it.... ...extension of this principle to insurance, probably means you merely insure what is built upon it, not the land. This may have extreme implications if the land becomes unusable due to coastal erosion or flooding, or subsidence etc. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:30:08 GMT, "Lobster"
wrote: "Jim Alexander" wrote in message ... "MM" wrote in message ... As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. Looked into this when renewing my insurance recently. Many companies will fill in a value based on the house details. If you accept their valuation you are usually covered whatever the actual costs. Egg had the closest to the ABI figure but still higher. Norwich Union were usually close but not for older houses. Esure who like to think they offer the lowest premiums had a ridulously high suggested value resulting in a higher premium. My buildings insurance is with the AA (which, unlike contents insurance or car insurance IME) is an excellent deal - but also, significantly for this thread, they aren't interested in the market or reinstatement value at all; they simply ask you for postcode, no of bedrooms etc, and you're covered for full reinstatement cost (they don't bother with giving you a figure). I recommend the OP at least gives them a go. Now this is a very interesting comment. Are you happy with the service you're getting? Can you pay by cheque? (I never use any form of credit, direct debit or standing order unless absolutely unavoidable.) MM |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 13:42:03 +0100, MM wrote:
Now this is a very interesting comment. Are you happy with the service you're getting? Can you pay by cheque? (I never use any form of credit, direct debit or standing order unless absolutely unavoidable.) MM Is your concern about a company direct debitting too much? The bank covers you for that. Standing orders are not a lot of use unless payments are level over a long period anyway. There can be advantages (although probably not in this case) of paying by credit card or other credit mechanism, because it provides additional consumer protection - I'm not suggesting running a credit balance, BTW. For other payments that are one-offs, I tend to ask the payee for their bank details and then simply pay them via an online transaction. It goes through as a BACS transfer (we talked about those a few days ago) This gives complete control and is far quicker and easier than messing around with cheques. I don;t remember writing a cheque for over a year..... -- ..andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
"MM" wrote in message ... I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. MM There is a book called 'Spons' something or other used by architects and engineers to calculate these things. Its brilliant for all kinds of estimating. It allows you to choose the type of construction, age etc. Google gives the following: Spons Estimating Costs Guide To Minor Wks, Alts & Repairs 2nd Ed. by Spain, Bryan. I think this is the correct one. Should be in a reference library. Peter Scott |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Peter Scott" wrote in message ... "MM" wrote in message ... I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! As I don't need a mortgage and the building is brand new, how am I supposed to find out what to insure it for? I believe the buildings insurance is normally a lot less than the price paid for the property. MM There is a book called 'Spons' something or other used by architects and engineers to calculate these things. Its brilliant for all kinds of estimating. It allows you to choose the type of construction, age etc. Google gives the following: Spons Estimating Costs Guide To Minor Wks, Alts & Repairs 2nd Ed. by Spain, Bryan. I think this is the correct one. Should be in a reference library. Peter Scott There are several books listed on: www.constructionbooksdirect.com Peter Scott |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 16:23:47 +0100, "Grant" wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message My buildings insurance is with the AA (which, unlike contents insurance or car insurance IME) is an excellent deal - but also, significantly for this thread, they aren't interested in the market or reinstatement value at all; they simply ask you for postcode, no of bedrooms etc, and you're covered for full reinstatement cost (they don't bother with giving you a figure). I recommend the OP at least gives them a go. 'More Than' is the same. The cover is for contents up to 60k and buildings up to 400k. Just had the renewal through and even with a family discount, my broker can't beat it. With More Than, do you have to do all the business with the company over the phone? I am of the 'old school' where one always tended to correspond (and expect replies) in writing. MM |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
"MM" wrote in message ... Now this is a very interesting comment. Are you happy with the service you're getting? Can you pay by cheque? (I never use any form of credit, direct debit or standing order unless absolutely unavoidable.) Well I've been with them - heaven's - 18 years now, since buying my first property. I keep checking their rates vs the competion, but despite having owned different types of property from Aberdeen to Bristol, I've never found any company cheaper. I've never had to make a claim, so can't comment on that side of their service - which of course is the crux of things - but whenever I've moved house etc, the changes have gone very smoothly, no probs. I'm almost certain they take cheques but I'm afraid I'm a fan of Visa myself! David |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hello, hello, is there anyone listening out there?
"House Rebuilding Cost Assessments for Insurance Purposes Most domestic house insurance policies require that the sum assured is the full rebuilding cost of the property. It is the responsibility of the insured to get this figure right. BCIS is commissioned by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) to provide guidance figures for the rebuilding cost of a home. The information in this section gives a general indication of rebuilding costs for many common properties within the UK, but it should be noted that it is not appropriate for all houses." http://www.bcis.co.uk/costass.html |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 30 Oct 2004 20:34:46 GMT, Jo wrote:
Hello, hello, is there anyone listening out there? "House Rebuilding Cost Assessments for Insurance Purposes Most domestic house insurance policies require that the sum assured is the full rebuilding cost of the property. Why? It is the responsibility of the insured to get this figure right. BCIS is commissioned by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) to provide guidance figures for the rebuilding cost of a home. The information in this section gives a general indication of rebuilding costs for many common properties within the UK, but it should be noted that it is not appropriate for all houses." http://www.bcis.co.uk/costass.html Phil The uk.d-i-y FAQ is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk/ Remove NOSPAM from address to email me |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:48:27 +0100, Andy Hall wrote:
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:35:00 +0100, MM wrote: I got one quote, and they worked out the value for buildings insurance based on post code, number of bedrooms and other points. Then I called another broker and she said her firm had to be advised the value required to be insured, as they could not themselves provide any estimate. I kind of had the feeling from them of, take it or leave it! These people employ actuaries. Actuaries are people who found accountancy too exciting. Insurance companies are basically the white collar version of a bookies and operate in similar ways - looking at odds and form, laying off bets and so on. So they look at what the others are doing as well as applying their own rules. Heh heh. Andy, you could compile a dictionary for cynics. Should be a best seller. Phil The uk.d-i-y FAQ is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk/ Remove NOSPAM from address to email me |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Phil Addison wrote in
: Why? I don't know the answer to your irrelevant question, I was quoting from the BCIS web site. Maybe you should ask most domestic house insurers, the ABI or BCIS. Meanwhile, back on topic, this site appears to answer the OP's question. |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Phil Addison wrote: On 30 Oct 2004 20:34:46 GMT, Jo wrote: Most domestic house insurance policies require that the sum assured is the full rebuilding cost of the property. Why? Because that's the risk they're covering. If you're under-insured, any claim will be subject to "averaging". If you insure your house for only half of its rebuilding cost, and half of it burns down, the insurance company will only pay out half of the insured value - which will only half pay for the repairs. -- Cheers, Set Square ______ Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid. |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Phil Addison writes: On 30 Oct 2004 20:34:46 GMT, Jo wrote: Hello, hello, is there anyone listening out there? "House Rebuilding Cost Assessments for Insurance Purposes Most domestic house insurance policies require that the sum assured is the full rebuilding cost of the property. Why? All insurance works that way. If you make a claim, and you were only insured for half the full cost, then you will only get half the claim, even if the claim is only for a 100th of the full cost. Same with home contents, etc. That's one of the things the insurance assessor is checking when he/she calls during a claim. -- Andrew Gabriel |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 00:18:26 +0100, "Set Square"
wrote: Phil Addison wrote: On 30 Oct 2004 20:34:46 GMT, Jo wrote: Most domestic house insurance policies require that the sum assured is the full rebuilding cost of the property. Why? Because that's the risk they're covering. The risk you are insuring yourself against is that of needing to be re-housed. I can think of no reason why that has to be achieved only by re-building. Taking the car write-off analogy, why can't the insurers just write you a cheque for the book (market) value of your house (less the sell-on value of the site). You are then free to use that as you wish to re-build or move elsewhere. Yes, I know most insurance companies talk in terms of re-building. My point is why can't it be the way I suggest? What happened to "you can insure for anything you want"? Should my house burn to the ground I wouldn't want the hassle of trying to get an 1890 Victorian house rebuilt in 2004. I would head for a hotel while I found a rented house, then start looking to buy another ready built property. I would expect the burnt out site to be cleared and sold as building land. If you're under-insured, any claim will be subject to "averaging". If you insure your house for only half of its rebuilding cost, and half of it burns down, the insurance company will only pay out half of the insured value - which will only half pay for the repairs. I fully understand that. Phil The uk.d-i-y FAQ is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk/ Remove NOSPAM from address to email me |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 30 Oct 2004 23:08:13 GMT, Jo wrote:
Phil Addison wrote in : Why? I don't know the answer to your irrelevant question, Clearly. I was quoting from the BCIS web site. I know. You quoted it. Maybe you should ask most domestic house insurers, the ABI or BCIS. Oh? You don't think folk on here are capable of answering me. Or more likely you just don't understand the implications of my question. Meanwhile, back on topic, this site appears to answer the OP's question. That was done to death days ago. This is an offshoot of the topic, and well within the specific subject line. Haven't you heard of thread drift? Phil The uk.d-i-y FAQ is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk/ Remove NOSPAM from address to email me |
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 30 Oct 2004 23:29:02 GMT, (Andrew
Gabriel) wrote: In article , Phil Addison writes: On 30 Oct 2004 20:34:46 GMT, Jo wrote: Hello, hello, is there anyone listening out there? "House Rebuilding Cost Assessments for Insurance Purposes Most domestic house insurance policies require that the sum assured is the full rebuilding cost of the property. Why? All insurance works that way. If you make a claim, and you were only insured for half the full cost, then you will only get half the claim, even if the claim is only for a 100th of the full cost. Same with home contents, etc. That's one of the things the insurance assessor is checking when he/she calls during a claim. Yes, I'm well aware of that Andrew. My previous remarks are all on the basis that I am fully covered and paid up. I am querying the whole basis of the idea that the insurance should be based on the need to re-build. I want to know why we can't be insured just sufficient to be able to buy a similar replacement home. Phil The uk.d-i-y FAQ is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk/ Remove NOSPAM from address to email me |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 23:54:10 GMT, Phil Addison
wrote: Should my house burn to the ground I wouldn't want the hassle of trying to get an 1890 Victorian house rebuilt in 2004. I would head for a hotel while I found a rented house, then start looking to buy another ready built property. I would expect the burnt out site to be cleared and sold as building land. Mind you, if you did get an 1890 Victorian house rebuilt, this time it would come with foundations! MM |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Jo" wrote in message ... Hello, hello, is there anyone listening out there? More than you credit since the link you provide has already appeared in the thread. "House Rebuilding Cost Assessments for Insurance Purposes Most domestic house insurance policies require that the sum assured is the full rebuilding cost of the property. It is the responsibility of the insured to get this figure right. Indeed and maybe but the thread has provided correct information that at least two insurers indemnify against actual rebuilding cost based on only house location and size and other insurers indemnify against actual rebuilding cost if their cost estimate is accepted. That may or may not be exactly what the OP wanted but its the way the group works until it gets taken of the rails for no apparent reason. BCIS is commissioned by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) to provide guidance figures for the rebuilding cost of a home. The information in this section gives a general indication of rebuilding costs for many common properties within the UK, but it should be noted that it is not appropriate for all houses." If its not appropriate for *most* then somebody has wasted their money. http://www.bcis.co.uk/costass.html In a way you pose a good question. The actual rebuilding cost will never be known until rebuilding out-turn costs are known but I would expect any rebuilding contract to be strongly influenced by floor area, cos that's how builders and architects work As I said its what the valuer would use anyway. And if the insurers really know better why should their suggested figure for the same house vary so much? Jim A |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Phil Addison wrote: The risk you are insuring yourself against is that of needing to be re-housed. I can think of no reason why that has to be achieved only by re-building. Taking the car write-off analogy, why can't the insurers just write you a cheque for the book (market) value of your house (less the sell-on value of the site). You are then free to use that as you wish to re-build or move elsewhere. The analogy doesn't quite work - because there are no scrapyards for crashed houses. AIUI you wouldn't be allowed by your local authority simply to abandon a wrecked house and move on. Would you be happy if your next door neighbour did that? The subject is a bit academic anyway. In most cases, the cost of re-building is considerably *less* than the market value of the property. So if you were insured for less than the re-building cost, you wouldn't have a hope in hell of buying another equivalent property with the insurance payout. -- Cheers, Set Square ______ Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid. |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
Phil Addison wrote:
I am querying the whole basis of the idea that the insurance should be based on the need to re-build. I want to know why we can't be insured just sufficient to be able to buy a similar replacement home. If "we" own the house outright, such a decision is ours to make. But most "homeowners" have a mortgage, and the mortgage provider wants very much to cover their backside, which they see as meaning that in the event of a total loss, a property with no less than the existing one's full resale value will appear in place of the smoking heap. (They would, I presume, argue that even if the outstanding mortgage was only, say, 30% of that value, their lending criteria had given that mortgage on the basis of covering a particular proportion of the purchase cost, and you'd be nadgering their carefully-constructed risk-of-nonrepayment profile if you put up a yurt in place of the elegant Georgian pile. Though if they got their outstanding mortgage repaid, I don't see it's any business of theirs what your future housing derangements might be...) Stefek |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Set Square" wrote
| Phil Addison wrote: | The risk you are insuring yourself against is that of needing | to be re-housed. No, because the council have a statutory obligation to provide you with housing eg after a fire. The risk is that of having to rebuild the house to soemthing like it was in accordance with current regs. | The analogy doesn't quite work - because there are no scrapyards for | crashed houses. | AIUI you wouldn't be allowed by your local authority simply to abandon a | wrecked house and move on. Would you be happy if your next door neighbour | did that? In many parts of the country, detached properties are probably in the minority, with semis or flats being more common. The obligations under Scottish law to provide support for adjoining houses within a building can be traced back to Roman law. Owain |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Property Border Lines | Home Repair | |||
| Buying a Flat - Insurance, Subsidence & Underpinning Questions/Concerns | UK diy | |||
| Shop Insurance..... | Metalworking | |||
Linear Mode
