house fire

[brassed]

can anyone help
I am a tenant and have recently had a house fire my contents insurance will cover redecoration but not replace window, door ect as they say this is down to the landlords building insurance, but my landlords are saying they wont cover them because it occured through our negliance a candle caused the fire and that we should have gotten our own buildings insurance but i didnt think we could do that does anyone know where we stand

[Aequitas]

If the landlord is responsible for something under his repairing obligations then he is still responsible for it if the repair is needed because of damage caused by an insured risk. The fact that the damage may have arisen because you were careless is immaterial - one of the reasons for insuring is to cover accidents. If the whole house burned down the landlord would soon be onto the insurance company. The fact that the actual damage was less serious does not change the position.

The notion that you should insure the buildings is plain wrong. In fact, no landlord wants double insurance. Insurance is a contract for indemnity. If something is insured with two different companies you can run into problems. Company A will argue that you are covered by Company B and Company B will argue that are covered by Company A and you go round and round in circles.

The landlord must carry out the repairs and whether he makes a claim is up to him. If he has to pay an excess or risks his premium going up that is his problem if he has not covered the position in the tenancy agreement.

[wino]

Yes definatly the Landlords responsibility.

[brassed]

thank you at the time i was on strong medication and didnt really know what i was doing so it wasnt as if i did it on purpose but spoke to landlords again this afternoon and they saythey are not budging on their decision

[Helford]

Under English Law it would be illegal for you to insure the buildings as you have no insurable interest. i.e. If you had insured the house and it had burnt down you would have benefited to the tune of many thousands of pounds yet you would have not actually suffered any financial loss - the payee would be yourself. Your only loss would be a temporary roof over your head!

It's the same as me going out and insuring my neighbours house and pocketing the money when it's destroyed!

Bottom line, he should insure buildings and claim on his insurance. He could try and make a civil claim against you for his excess (probably less than a £100 ish). Theoretically, the buildings insurers could try and hold you liable for the loss, most unlikey though.

H