EBM Insurance

I have started to hunt for a Landlord Insurance cover and I was told about EBM which I had never heard before.
How will you rate EBM for a landlord insurance? any users and comments would help me to decide.
 
i use ebm for my properties and have found them impressive and good value overall particularly with their discounts on multiple properties.

just be aware they only cover 6 weeks of rental loss unless you cannot gain access to the property for whatever reason.
 
i use ebm for my properties and have found them impressive and good value overall particularly with their discounts on multiple properties.

just be aware they only cover 6 weeks of rental loss unless you cannot gain access to the property for whatever reason.

My policy says that for claims against clauses 4a-4c inclusive (unfit for living in, denial of access tenant dies or suicides) the cover is up to 52 weeks. The policy states that
"The period for which we provide cover is from the date of loss or damage until either:
* your premises are re-tenanted, or
* where there is an ongoing lease liability, up to six weeks following your premises becoming suitable for tenants to move in again".

The next clause has a six weeks provision for people who die or self-destruct onsite.

I cannot comment as to how often these events occur.
 
Have you ever had a claim experience with them?

yes, several

very efficient, no funny business but they stick to their PDS word. for. word. (like that was going to be a surprise)

make sure you read it thoroughly, very carefully and make sure its exacting to your needs.
 
haha self destruct on premises

Me imagines road runner and coyote , while coyote blows him self up

See clause 4rr for this provision. I expressly prohibit the keeping of animals. Elephants are a particular nuisance: the trumpeting breaks glass.
 
The number of weeks covered depends on circumstances. For example:

Default of rent and broken leases: 6 weeks
Tenant Hardship: 6 weeks
Denial of Access (tenant refuses to leave): 52 weeks
Prevention of access: 52 weeks
Defined events (fire, storm etc.): 52 weeks
Malicious Damage by tenant: 52 weeks
Accidental Damage: 52 weeks
Theft by Tenant: 52 weeks
Death of Tenant: 52 weeks

The default of rent and broken leases are the basic circumstances and the 6 weeks is in addition to whatever you can cover with the bond (if anything remains after cleaning etc.)

Importantly there is no excess on loss of rent claims.
 
The number of weeks covered depends on circumstances. For example:

Default of rent and broken leases: 6 weeks
Tenant Hardship: 6 weeks
Denial of Access (tenant refuses to leave): 52 weeks
Prevention of access: 52 weeks
Defined events (fire, storm etc.): 52 weeks
Malicious Damage by tenant: 52 weeks
Accidental Damage: 52 weeks
Theft by Tenant: 52 weeks
Death of Tenant: 52 weeks

The default of rent and broken leases are the basic circumstances and the 6 weeks is in addition to whatever you can cover with the bond (if anything remains after cleaning etc.)

Importantly there is no excess on loss of rent claims.
"Malicious Damage by tenant: 52 weeks"

so does this mean that if the tenant leaves owing rent and decides to use practice his boxing skills on the walls,

then you are up for 1 excess for malicious damage, no excess for loss of rent, with up to 52 weeks coverage?
 
The next clause has a six weeks provision for people who die or self-destruct onsite.

I cannot comment as to how often these events occur.

Okay I'll bite, otherwise I'll spend the next two hours searching for some reference to "self-destruct" in the PDS. Where and what?????
 
"Malicious Damage by tenant: 52 weeks"

so does this mean that if the tenant leaves owing rent and decides to use practice his boxing skills on the walls,

then you are up for 1 excess for malicious damage, no excess for loss of rent, with up to 52 weeks coverage?

As long as it's classified as "malicious damage" then essentially yes. The "up to 52 weeks" is to repair the damage, so if there are 10 holes punched in a wall so it needs to be repaired, you can't take a year to do it. It would allow for reasonable time to repair the property, plus up to six weeks to find a new tenant where there is an ongoing lease liability. This would attract one excess for the malicious damage claim, and no excess on loss of rent. You've also got your bond that can be used towards cleaning etc. or even to effectively pay the excess.
 
Does EBM landlord policies cover for FLOODS? I read the PDS over and over and couldn't find so. Have I missed it? any thoughts
 
Does EBM landlord policies cover for FLOODS? I read the PDS over and over and couldn't find so. Have I missed it? any thoughts

I'm pretty confident that my EBM policy excludes flood cover - Brettc will give you the definitative answer however.
 
Does EBM landlord policies cover for FLOODS? I read the PDS over and over and couldn't find so. Have I missed it? any thoughts

At this stage it excludes flood, bearing in mind of course that "flood" is a very specific definition, there are still a large number of water damage and storm events that many people may perceive as flood yet are in fact covered under different definitions.

As has been stated elsewhere, yes we will be introducing flood, it's just been a bit of a battle out of our control to get it right, but hopefully not too far away.

And I did see an email alert for another question that seems to have now been deleted, so maybe you have now found the answer. But I will throw it in here anyway. Yes, a dishwasher and a reverse cycle heater/air conditioner are covered as contents, they are covered under the contents definition of "built in furniture, cupboards, non-portable stoves, non-portable electrical equipment, water heaters and coolers and space heaters and coolers".
 
Thanks Bret.
Thanks also for commenting on my deleted message. I thought it was a stupid question when no one answered.
Anyway, need more clarity on this. Some providers say that a dishwasher which is connected to plumbing as well as a oven thats connected to the main gas system is part of building but not belonging to contents. Is that correct.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top