dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

Orlando, FL
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
reply to Frank

Re: Should we let the tenant move back in after the fire?

said by Frank:

said by jjoshua:

said by tcope:

I'm guessing you don't have, as part of the rental contract, that the tenant have renters insurance. I'd _certainly_ add that in your lease upon next renewal. I'd also require that you be listed as an Additional Interest on the policy. That way you should be informed if the policy is no longer active (you may also want to contact the insurance company every few months and confirm it's still active). Also put in the lease that lacking a renters insurance policy that you have the right to give the tenant xx days notice and can evict for this reason (check to see what the law will allow in your area).

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.

Yes a tenant can be forced to have a renter's insurance policy. The last two leases i've signed (where the landlord was a corporation that owns many many properties) have had proof of renter's insurance listed as a requirement prior to being able to reside in the property. I'm pretty sure that's there for the benefit of the landlord in case something goes wrong (ie: fire) otherwise it wouldn't be a requirement.

Nationwide requires me to have my tenants carry renters insurance to be able to have better coverage. It is a part of the lease that a lawyer wrote up for me. In the op's situation I would do what I could to terminate the lease and not allow them back in.