All Forum Posts by: Owen Rosen

 Not enough information here to answer this question accurately.

Is the home a total loss?  If you choose not to rebuild/replace your settlement would usually be for actual cash value.

It's unlikely you can get a settlement for above the coverage amount you paid for.

@Ryan Kelly mentions what is known as extended dwelling coverage.  That is coverage above the stated coverage A/dwelling amount if needed to rebuild.  That applies to replacement cost only and only if more $ is needed to restore the home to a pre-loss condition than what is available under coverage A.

With regards to an umbrella policy they are typically good to have.  

That said, an umbrella doesn't have anything to do with the original question of the thread.  The poster was asking about broken/damaged household items and guests destroying a rental.  An umbrella has nothing to do with those circumstances.

I think some people hear umbrella and assume it's some sort of magical insurance that will protect them if anything goes wrong.  That's not the case.  It's designed to protect assets in the event of lawsuits, negligence, etc. and it only applies when there is underlying insurance coverage.  That's it.  It doesn't add layers of physical damage coverage or cover things that wouldn't otherwise be covered.

 I'm an independent agency owner that represents both Foremost and Obie.  Obie is a great product as is Foremost.  Obie provides non-admitted coverage though so it's different than Foremost in most areas.

That said, Obie does not insure mobile homes @Rachel H.

This is correct. STR is different from LTR for insurance. You have to be up front about how the property is being used.

Also, remember that umbrella insurance will not do anything for you if the underlying property or vehicle is not insured correctly.  No protection in those cases whatsoever.  Also, umbrella is for liability only (lawsuit protection) and not property protection.

 Goosehead is a franchised agency.  It's not an insurance company/carrier.  Just clarifying for those out there.  

I've heard nothing but complaints from customers AND their franchise agents reegarding the quality of their 800-number service center.

Sent a DM

Rod, are you sure about this?  Many insurance companies do not allow adding a landlord as additional insured.  Sometimes agents do it because they don't know any better, are order takers, or make a mistake.  Additional interest?  Absolutely.

If a landlord is listed as additional insured (rather than additional interest) they cannot make a claim against one another's liability policy for damages - it could completely jeopardize the coverage they think they're making it easier to get.  This isn't good for the landlord or tenant.

Your tenant can get renters insurance in their name - not yours.  You aren't the insured in this case.

Renters insurance does not cover the physical damage of the real property - it covers the tenants personal property and other things.  Landlord insurance covers the dwelling/property.

Renters insurance has liability coverage which might provide you coverage if your tenant is negligent or liable for an accident/damages, etc.

You can/should have your tenant list you as an "Additional Interest" on their policy.  This is different from "Additional Insured."  Landlords should not be listed as an "Additional Insured" as that implies they have insurable interest (they don't) and have authority to file claims or receive coverage (such as in a lawsuit) from the renters insurance.  This in actuality is not correct

As an Additional Interest, you will receive notifications about the status of the policy to make sure it remains in force.  Similar to a mortgage company on a landlord policy.  

Renters insurance will not under any circumstances "satisfy" your mortgage company.

 Yes, you can't have both