I'm wanting to call our insurer and get quotes for insurance for four houses in Brisbane. One is brick, three bedroom, one bathroom, two storey but living all on upper floor, downstairs just storage/rumpus/car accom, laundry, spare loo, not legal height.
Another is breeze block construction, stucco, four bedroom, one bathroom, single storey, no car accom under the main roof.
Other two are timber. One is post war, three bed, one bath, deck.
Second one is large(ish) queenslander, five bedrooms, (three are tiny rooms), two bathrooms (DIY - nothing too flash), large lounge/dining, highset on stumps, nothing underneath but stumps, storage and third toilet.
I asked a builder if he could put some sort of replacement cost on one single level, upstairs living, downstairs storage and battened in queenslander a few months back. He said he wasn't comfortable doing that for insurance purposes, and we would need a quantity surveyor to estimate what the replacement cost would be in the event of total loss.
I've been told by that same builder (in another call nothing to do with insurance questions) that he can build a four bedroom, two bathroom double storey house for me and I'd get change out of $300K.
I'm just wanting to get an idea of what we insure these houses for without going to the expense and trouble of getting in a quantity surveyor. The insurer we are looking at allows 20% for site clearance and preparation (architect fees?) for new build after total loss, so we don't need to allow for site clearance.
None of these houses are mansions so I'm wondering how other investors choose insurance replacement costs for their houses.
I'm thinking of just making each one $300K. In the event of total loss for any of them, we would not be building anything more than four bedroom, two bathroom double storey houses to replace what is there.
Am I missing something, or does that sound sensible.
(In years past I used to over insure, but these days it is a costly thing to do.)
Another is breeze block construction, stucco, four bedroom, one bathroom, single storey, no car accom under the main roof.
Other two are timber. One is post war, three bed, one bath, deck.
Second one is large(ish) queenslander, five bedrooms, (three are tiny rooms), two bathrooms (DIY - nothing too flash), large lounge/dining, highset on stumps, nothing underneath but stumps, storage and third toilet.
I asked a builder if he could put some sort of replacement cost on one single level, upstairs living, downstairs storage and battened in queenslander a few months back. He said he wasn't comfortable doing that for insurance purposes, and we would need a quantity surveyor to estimate what the replacement cost would be in the event of total loss.
I've been told by that same builder (in another call nothing to do with insurance questions) that he can build a four bedroom, two bathroom double storey house for me and I'd get change out of $300K.
I'm just wanting to get an idea of what we insure these houses for without going to the expense and trouble of getting in a quantity surveyor. The insurer we are looking at allows 20% for site clearance and preparation (architect fees?) for new build after total loss, so we don't need to allow for site clearance.
None of these houses are mansions so I'm wondering how other investors choose insurance replacement costs for their houses.
I'm thinking of just making each one $300K. In the event of total loss for any of them, we would not be building anything more than four bedroom, two bathroom double storey houses to replace what is there.
Am I missing something, or does that sound sensible.
(In years past I used to over insure, but these days it is a costly thing to do.)