 nunyaWho is John Galt?Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:8
 ·Charter
 ·surpasshosting
 ·voip.ms
| reply to 80289148
Re: Should we let the tenant move back in after the fire? »www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issu···atus=301
You don't see them much any more. They are banned in a lot of places.
--
If someone refers to herself / himself as a "guru", they probably aren't. |
|
 Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to tcope
said by tcope:said by jjoshua:Renter's insurance only covers the tenant's personal property and personal liability. I doubt that you can force a tenant to have a policy unless you're the government and we're talking about health insurance. It addresses losses that the tenant is liable for... such as in this case. If the tenant had a renters policy, it should have paid for this loss. Most apartment complexes require tenants have a renters policy but I'd say most don't enforce this. I work as an adjuster and handle claims for a plan called "Renters Legal Liability". It's not a Renters policy but I can say that the complex force places this policy on any renter that cannot show that they have their own Renters policy. So I'd think a landlord can enforce the requirement that a renter have insurance. It only makes sense and if it's in the rental contract I'd think it could be enforced. However, the landlord would still need to follow state laws on eviction. That's interesting when I bought my dad renters insurance it specifically stated it covered his personal property and not the dwelling (Apt). |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to Pacrat
said by Pacrat:When I was first married, we rented a small apartment in a converted two-story house. Our renters insurance covered only our loss... the contents of the apartment, nothing regarding the structure of the building. There was no liability coverage at all, because that was deemed to be the landlord's domain as the property owner. I seriously doubt the tennant would be found liable for damages... unless found to be so by a court ruling. Either way it's going to cost the landlord some money.
The fly in the ointment, so to speak, is whether or not the building is being legally rented and approved for occupancy as a commercial entity.
Exactly it covers the personal property of the renter. Nothing at all with the structure. |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to nunya
said by nunya:http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-02-08/article/29147?headline=The-Care-and-Feeding-of-Floor-Furnaces&status=301
You don't see them much any more. They are banned in a lot of places.
Wonder if the writer even has been around one? I lived in a home with one for 17 years. My dad, mom and 2 sisters did not die from CO poisoning, the house did not burn down and the temperature was not that difficult to regulate. |
|
|
|
tcopePremium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2 | reply to Jack_in_VA
A renters policy is going to have two parts. The forst part is Liability coverage. This is when the renter is liable for injury to others or damage to their personal property.
The second part of the policy is to cover the renters personal property.
Liability coverage may be even more important for people to have then covering their own personal property. In this case of this post the renter us lucky that the home did not burn down. If it had, and the cause could be found, the OP's own carrier would have paid the lose and sought recovery from the renter. Where is the renter going to get $100,000 to pay for the loss of the home? Even if the renters liability limits were less, at least the renters carrier could (would) offer up the limits in return for a release (and the OP's carrier would most certainly sign a release for the policy limits as the alternative is.... nothing from the renter).
"Personal liability
Personal liability renters insurance policies may cover bodily injury and property damage to others caused by your actions or negligence." |
|
 CheesePremium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1 | reply to Jack_in_VA
The article is almost 5 years old as well |
|
| reply to Jack_in_VA
I have renters insurance that covers both personal property and the cost of damage to the landlords property within the unit. The landlord recently mandated it but I already had it and simply had to have the landlord listed as an interested party. |
|
 BloggerJedi PosterPremium
join:2012-10-18
·Champion Broadba..
| reply to Jack_in_VA
said by Jack_in_VA:said by nunya:You don't see them much any more. They are banned in a lot of places.
Wonder if the writer even has been around one? I lived in a home with one for 17 years. My dad, mom and 2 sisters did not die from CO poisoning, the house did not burn down and the temperature was not that difficult to regulate. I grew up in a home with several of them--or at least several vents to one. They were very common for homes built during the period of the forties in California.
Never had a problem with it but then of course we never sat anything on top of the vent either. Maybe there is a connection there? |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to microphone
said by microphone:I have renters insurance that covers both personal property and the cost of damage to the landlords property within the unit. The landlord recently mandated it but I already had it and simply had to have the landlord listed as an interested party.
quote:
damage to the landlords property within the unit.
That's not the same as damage to the landlords unit. Probably refers to refrigerator, stove, washer/dryer etc.
Last week some clown was keeping snakes in a storage unit using heat lamps to keep them warm. Well the lamps started a fire and burned 40 units up. The owner stated that her insurance would cover the units but not the renters contents that they had to have their own renters insurance to cover. |
|
 mattmagPremium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-04-09
NW Illinois
kudos:3 | reply to walta
My concern would revolve around how a jury would view the testimony of your tenant if it came down to that. I believe they would be quite sympathetic to the situation, and she could easily testify that she "thought it was just a heat register" and had no idea what a floor furnace was.
Unless she was given strict instructions on the proper use of such a unit, I'd think she has a very strong chance to prevail.
Not that I think you are wrong and she is right, I just know how juries view such situations. |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to Blogger
said by Blogger:said by Jack_in_VA:said by nunya:You don't see them much any more. They are banned in a lot of places.
Wonder if the writer even has been around one? I lived in a home with one for 17 years. My dad, mom and 2 sisters did not die from CO poisoning, the house did not burn down and the temperature was not that difficult to regulate. I grew up in a home with several of them--or at least several vents to one. They were very common for homes built during the period of the forties in California. Never had a problem with it but then of course we never sat anything on top of the vent either. Maybe there is a connection there? In spite of some posts here I googled "Floor Furnace", Gas fired floor furnace and oil fired floor furnace. I found out they are very much alive and well with many types and manufacturers and even carry ul listings.
»www.barnesheatingandcooling.com/···temid=26 |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to TheTechGuru
said by TheTechGuru:Electric Dryer 30amps + Electric Stove 50amps = 80amps
Hope no one is ever using all 4 burners and the oven to cook a thanksgiving dinner and doing laundry at the same time.
Is the water heater electric too?
80% rule says its more like 24 + 40 = 64. It will have to be 15 minutes for 64 amp load to blow a fuse with that low of an overload. Your on thin water with that load, but its not fire inducing assuming everything is fused correctly. |
|
Zach 58Premium
join:2006-11-26
NW Minnesota | reply to Jack_in_VA
Even LP and Natural Gas units with millivolt controls are still in production! For those with enough connected brain cells to remember the grill will be HOT when the unit is operating, one of these may be a viable option for backup heat since they require no electricity. The manual does state these have high-limits and controls to cycle the burner to help keep grill temps down a bit.
»www.empirezoneheat.com/ehs/index···lnid=80#
--
Zach |
|
| reply to patcat88
True, but that's assuming everything is done correctly.
Sometimes minor upgrades are done to the house without the drop to the house being upgraded thus the wires to the house get hot and the insulation melts then the unfused wires short causing huge arcs that light the dry winter yard on fire.
Glad I have a 200amp supply line.
--
CompTIA Network+ Certified |
|
| reply to walta
The renter is most likely more upset about her clothes getting ruined. I'm surprised she isn't demanding her clothes be replaced by the landlord.
I've seen crazier things. |
|
tcopePremium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2 | reply to Jack_in_VA
Re: Should we let the tenant move back in after the fire? said by Jack_in_VA:That's not the same as damage to the landlords unit. Probably refers to refrigerator, stove, washer/dryer etc. A renters policy providers the _insured_ liability coverage for property damage and bodily injury. It's not limited to the property inside of a building. In this case it would address the damage to the building itself. |
|
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
·Time Warner Cable
| reply to nunya
said by nunya:http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-02-08/article/29147?headline=The-Care-and-Feeding-of-Floor-Furnaces&status=301
You don't see them much any more. They are banned in a lot of places.
Just the thought of having a big, dangerously hot grate that I'd have to tiptoe around in a hallway or living room just gives me the jeebies... might as well have an old-fashioned "franklin" stove in the middle of the living room! If I were looking to buy a place that had one, I'd either replace it with a safer heating system before the first winter in the place or just pass on the place altogether. Hopefully I'm never in a position where I have to rent and can't choose another place that doesn't have a floor furnace. I'm just boggled at why these were popular at one point... they don't heat all rooms in the home evenly, you have to tiptoe around that bigass grate, stuff (usually kid's toys and other small objects) commonly fell down into the grate creating a fire hazard. I'd take an old "octopus" gravity furnace any day over a floor furnace! |
|
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
·Time Warner Cable
| said by slyphoxj:said by nunya:http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-02-08/article/29147?headline=The-Care-and-Feeding-of-Floor-Furnaces&status=301
You don't see them much any more. They are banned in a lot of places.
Just the thought of having a big, dangerously hot grate that I'd have to tiptoe around in a hallway or living room just gives me the jeebies... might as well have an old-fashioned "franklin" stove in the middle of the living room! If I were looking to buy a place that had one, I'd either replace it with a safer heating system before the first winter in the place or just pass on the place altogether. Hopefully I'm never in a position where I have to rent and can't choose another place that doesn't have a floor furnace. I'm just boggled at why these were popular at one point... they don't heat all rooms in the home evenly, you have to tiptoe around that bigass grate, stuff (usually kid's toys and other small objects) commonly fell down into the grate creating a fire hazard. I'd take an old "octopus" gravity furnace any day over a floor furnace! Another thought... It may be possible to prevent a fire hazard by being extremely careful to not place any objects on the heat grate, but not if a cat or other pet bats a toy around and the toy lands on the grate. |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to tcope
said by tcope:said by Jack_in_VA:That's not the same as damage to the landlords unit. Probably refers to refrigerator, stove, washer/dryer etc. A renters policy providers the _insured_ liability coverage for property damage and bodily injury. It's not limited to the property inside of a building. In this case it would address the damage to the building itself. I bought renters insurance for 15 years for my father. The agent (mine) and the policy plainly stated it did not cover the building. Only his personal property. The owner carries the dwelling insurance.
It's amazing how much legal advice is on a home improvement forum from people with no training or a license to practice law . |
|
