Quote:
Originally Posted by rockfan4
Almost a year ago, I bought a house about 3 1/2 hours from us, so my stepdaughter and her husband could live there, and so, as my wife put it, "Our granddaughter doesn't grow up in a sh**hole". At the time we insured it as a rental, even though what they're giving us is nowhere near market rate, and just barely covers expenses with a little left over if something needs fixing.
This year I want to shop around a bit for insurance, especially since the company we have it with has raised the rate another $100. One of the agents says since we are at the house several times a year, we can insure it as a vacation home rather than a rental. He said it doesn't matter that they're living there. Does this sound legit? I'm all for saving a few bucks, but if a claim gets denied, then that's no good.
Thanks in advance.
|
On its face it doesn't sound right. I am an agent in NJ so Wisconsin may be different. In general insurance policies are standardized but each company does have nuances and there are different levels of coverage and if you go outside the admitted market (Statefarm, Geico, etc.) into the excess market (Lloyd's) you may find variations.
In my market most of our secondary Homeowners policies will permit renting, but they all limit the amount of time for renting from a few days to up to 12 weeks. So renting is permitted but not if the tenant is a full time resident.
On a side note, I hope you required your daughter to purchase a tenant homeowners policy (HO-4) ? If not do it even if you it. You will save yourself and them a lot of headaches if something does happen.