Apologies if this has already been covered and if so could someone please direct me to the conversation.
Has any other BC committees been successful in finding an insurer that does not have an natural disaster excess of 5% of site sum insured. ie a BC with a value of $5M has an excess of $250K. I have checked with Vero and NZI to no avail and our broker has said there is no provider in NZ that does not have this clause.
I understand that this is a safeguard for the insurer as in most BC situations where the property is one footprint on multiple levels, apartments and the like, to repair one property there is typically an effect on several neighbours.
Our situation is that our BC is all one level and properties share at most a side wall with a neighbour so in the event of an earthquake and one property is damaged substantially but the rest get away lightly then there will be an unfair burden on those who are least effected and any properties who have a miraculous nil effect will actually be out of pocket having to pay an excess for no repairs.
So has anyone found an alternative to this issue or how do they plan on addressing the issue in the event of a big one?
Then again there could be another way to interpret the policy, but our broker did confirm my understanding as correct.
Many Thanks
Chris
Has any other BC committees been successful in finding an insurer that does not have an natural disaster excess of 5% of site sum insured. ie a BC with a value of $5M has an excess of $250K. I have checked with Vero and NZI to no avail and our broker has said there is no provider in NZ that does not have this clause.
I understand that this is a safeguard for the insurer as in most BC situations where the property is one footprint on multiple levels, apartments and the like, to repair one property there is typically an effect on several neighbours.
Our situation is that our BC is all one level and properties share at most a side wall with a neighbour so in the event of an earthquake and one property is damaged substantially but the rest get away lightly then there will be an unfair burden on those who are least effected and any properties who have a miraculous nil effect will actually be out of pocket having to pay an excess for no repairs.
So has anyone found an alternative to this issue or how do they plan on addressing the issue in the event of a big one?
Then again there could be another way to interpret the policy, but our broker did confirm my understanding as correct.
Many Thanks
Chris