 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So. Mum died, I'm the executor, house is left in trust for me in the end but the will says her long-term partner gets to live there as long as he likes (with a few conditions). Will says he has to insure and maintain it.
So far so good, he gets to stay in his home pretty much as before, if something needs fixing he just goes ahead and gets it fixed.
But it is now time to renew the buildings insurance and we are finding it a little tricky as *he* is trying to insure it but it's *my* name (as trustee of the will) on the Land Registry.
LV has already told him that unless you're the owner they won't sell you buildings insurance, regardless of whether you have "an insurable interest" (which he does).
I had a chat with Direct Line & they seemed to conflate it with the case where parents buy a flat for their kids to stay in for uni, but ... it's not quite the same as you can see.
I see a shedload of ringing round ahead of me but if anyone's managed to get a similar situation sorted, tell me how you managed it!
It's not *that* unusual for a surviving partner or spouse to get a life interest in a house but the incomprehension of the insurance co.s is... a bit frustrating.
Why don't you just insure it in your name and have him refund you the money?
And, I really should have said, I'm sorry about your mum.
Go direct to an insurance broker and explain the scenario. They will find you a suitable insurer.
Well I don't live there. So he's the one who has most immediate need of the insurance - e.g. if roof blows off, he's the one who needs alternative accommodation, he's the one with the key letting in builders and loss adjusters.
So not only do I want to avoid being involved in the renewal every year (true but admittedly a petty point), more importantly it would be good if I didn't have to be involved in claims (unless, God forbid, the house burned down with him in it, in which case I *would* need me to get the rebuild money rather than his heirs... (Boy, this is grim!)
If, say, he were to be flooded out while I was hols somewhere remote (hols, remember them?) the last thing he'd need is for the insurance people to say they'll only speak to me!
But does that make sense?
LV and Direct Line are telling you the truth. He needs to insure his stuff (contents) and you need to insure your's (buildings). He's just a tenant who happens to pay nothing towards the rent. Whoever drew up the will probably didn't understand insurable interest.
But as he's responsible for repairing and maintaining the building, not to mention has a right of residence there, and therefore if the roof blows off is most definitely going to have to shell out for a new roof and a hotel, ... does this not constitute an insurable interest? #confused
Under the terms, it's only my house insofar as it's my name not his on the Land Registry. I can't sell it or do stuff to it at all, I don't even have a key. He can paint it purple and put artificial turf on the garden and stone cladding out front should (unlikely!)he so wish! Effectively as long as he keeps to the will trust terms it's his house.
Not arguing btw just finding this all a bit of a maze IYSWIM - how does it work ...
Have dropped a local broker a line anyway!
Sorry about your Mum.
I might be too cynical, but if a house was left in trust for me, I would want to insure it myself to make sure it was adequately covered, and not forgotten one year.
Although it seems harsh, what Rich_s said up there ^ sounds reasonable.
Unfortunately, that leaves an awkward conversation about who should pay the buildings insurance premium.