Why are we keeping them warm when we have home owners insurance

[logansdad]

This dawned on me today dw asked why we have the heat on at the old house and I said that we dont want to be liable for damage due to broken pipes. Dw lived in a house during college rented from one of her roommates parents. They went out of town and came back to broken pipes. The home owners covered it. Isn't that why we have home owners ?? Am I missing something here??

[jlmaca]

This dawned on me today dw asked why we have the heat on at the old house and I said that we dont want to be liable for damage due to broken pipes. Dw lived in a house during college rented from one of her roommates parents. They went out of town and came back to broken pipes. The home owners covered it. Isn't that why we have home owners ?? Am I missing something here??

I think maybe what is missing here is intent. It might be easy for the insurance company to deny the claim knowing that you voluntarily left the home?

[justbroke]

If you're so concerned, it's probably CHEAPER to have the home winterized, than to keep heating it. Also, heating it doesn't guarantee that the pipes won't freeze, especially if your wet wall is an exterior uninsulated wall.

[LadyInTheRed]

Have you informed the insurance company that the house is vacant? If not, that fact alone could cause them to deny a claim. As your concern about the pipes illustrates, a vacant house involves different risks than an occupied one.

Could you turn off the water main and drain all of the water out of the pipes then turn off the heat? I don't live in a cold climate, so I don't know if that would work.

[desertgrl74]

You need to look at your policy because mine states that nothing is covered if the property is vacated after 30 days. So, if they were to cover anything, it would have to happen within those 30 days. You might be paying money for nothing. If something happens, most likely it won't be covered.

[MSbklawyer]

Most homeowners polices have an exception to coverage of damage caused by freezing of pipes unless the insured has taken reasonable steps to prevent freezing. Look at your policy. I'd bet you a nickle it's in there. Plus what desertgrl 74 says is right too. There's no coverage at all if the house is vacant.

But you don't need to keep it toasty warm. Put your thermostat on the lowest setting. As long as it doesn't go down to below freezing it will be ok.

There was a post here by Hub some months ago. He does some really strange things with antifreeze and enema bottles that I wouldn't mention in polite comany.

[justbroke]

Yes, as others are saying, you need a different binder (policy) when the home is unoccupied. You may find that your insurer will drop you anyhow, and you'd need to seek another policy with a different insurer. I would still look into the winterization as well.

[BCA2009]

I'm curious if anyone has heard of an actual case where damage was done to a house (for whatever reason - Storms ;Vandals, etc) after the owners left it, and Court refused to dismiss the debt in BK, or held the owners responsible for repairs.

I know my promissary note states that if I drop insurance coverage, the bank will provide coverage and try to charge me for it. Why would this be any different in a BK situation.

[justbroke]

In the Bankruptcy context, once your "in personam" or personal liability related to the physical home itself is removed, you wouldn't owe anything. The real problem is with "liability" related to accidents occurring on the property to individuals. Whether it's a drunk or breaks in and falls, or a small child who enters the unattended pool area and drowns, you are personally liable for those events.

The only reason to keep insurance on the home post-petition -- when surrendering -- is really one of liability related to personal injury to third parties... not to the destruction of the property itself. Even lender placed insurance -- forced placed insurance -- doesn't protect you from liability claims related to injury!

[ToughTimes]

In the Bankruptcy context, once your "in personam" or personal liability related to the physical home itself is removed, you wouldn't owe anything. The real problem is with "liability" related to accidents occurring on the property to individuals. Whether it's a drunk or breaks in and falls, or a small child who enters the unattended pool area and drowns, you are personally liable for those events.

The only reason to keep insurance on the home post-petition -- when surrendering -- is really one of liability related to personal injury to third parties... not to the destruction of the property itself. Even lender placed insurance -- forced placed insurance -- doesn't protect you from liability claims related to injury!

We obtained "renters' insurance" with considerable liability coverage to replace our homeowners' insurance once discharged. The renters' policy covers our personal property, which was important to us as we moved across the country during that same time frame. The renters' policy covers our personal possessions and liability. That's all we feel we need right now. Frankly, we don't care if the place does burn down, but we'd be very sorry to hear that trespassing berry pickers had sprained an ankle in a groundhog hole, or worse, since hunters, too, find the property attractive.

Even with very generous coverage, the renters' policy costs roughly half what we were paying for homeowners' in Ohio.

[seriously]

Bumping this post because it's so close to my question... speaking with my insurance guy about another matter the other day, I mentioned that the house was in FC and asked him if I move out, do I need to do anything special. I thought it was a perfectly valid question, since my atty had told me I needed to keep ins--I just wanted to do it the correct way. Well, ins guy replied that as far as he knew I would be living in the house and we never had this conversation. Whoops This leads me to believe that if I were to vacate the house, my ins policy would be somehow void.

My atty told me that I could move wherever I wanted, whenever I wanted as long as I informed the bank that I was leaving, and kept ins on the house. I had been planning to move this spring--it's only b/c I suddenly developed a health problem that I'm not in another state already. IF something were to happen that needed ins--well, if my ins bills were being mailed to another state, my phone here was turned off, etc etc, it would be pretty hard to say that I was still living in this house...

Due to my health problem, I need to stay in this area another 6 mos-- but it's been almost a year since I made a mortgage payment, and i'm in a slow state (NY), so I'm worried it could drag on even longer than that. What should I do about my ins if I want to leave before the FC goes through? Should I call the bank? Find another insurer--and will anyone even insure the property if it's vacant? Or do I just have to stay here until the bitter end?

Thanks in advance for any advice!