House buying/selling and buildings insurance

I once looked into doing B when I was considering buying a property which had been underpinned, to ensure continuity of cover... they turned it down flat (and I didn't proceed any further!)

so you did not go through with the house purchase due to the inability to ensure continuity of cover?

and why was your request for continuity of cover turned down?

Yes. This was a property I was considering as a buy-to-let; it had had a bay window underpinned and although it had clearly been done properly and all the necessary paperwork was in place I knew that getting insurance would be an issue. The smart money says that in such circumstances you should continue cover with the same insurer that originally stumped up for the underpinning; that way should there ever be any further problems then you don't end up with two insurers pointing the finger at each other and denying liability.

Can't remember - it was a few years ago but I don't think they gave one.

IIRC I think I eventually found just one specialist company who was prepared to take the property on, but with huge premiums, and considering the whole scenario through the eyes of somebody in the future buying the property from me, was enough to make me walk away. It would have needed a very substantial price drop (which wasn't forthcoming) for me to have pursued it any further.

AFAICR the property came off the market and was rented out again by the original owners.

When we sold our house a couple of years ago, the insurance company insured our present house up to completion, and our then future house from contract signing; in effect there was an overlap of a couple of weeks.

I have no idea what our buyers did.

Talk to your insurers.

our present house up to

was an overlap of a couple of weeks.

This is normal procedure. You want to insure the house you are buying from exchange of contracts onwards, as you are now at risk if something happens to it.

Andy

In message , Stephen H writes

Insurance is a contract between the holder and the insurance company. It ends if the holder no longer has a financial interest in the item insured. Your option B would be totally impractical.

You ensure continuity by taking out your own policy to start at date and time completion.

In message , Lobster writes

Use the same insurance company by all means but that is not the same as taking over the sellers policy which was what the OP was suggesting