Technical > Home Improvement > Should we let the tenant move back in after the fire?

said by tcope:

I've been adjusting claims for about 25 years now. Have handled hundreds (if not in the thousands) of claims in suit (probably have 30 in suit right now), attended hundreds of settlement conferences, meditations and trials on insurance claims.

A renters policy covers the _renter_... not the building owner. It provides the renter personal property coverage and liability coverage. Even though liability payments go to 3rd parties, it actually protects (covers) the renter. The renter does not get a policy on a certain property or location... it insures the renters property where ever it's located and also provides liability coverage on the renter where ever that renter may be (usually limited to US locations).

I think where you are going down the wrong path is that the renters policy _does not_ insure the dwelling, as you mentioned. That is, it's not listed on the policy as an insured location with coverage (such as a home owners policy would). The renters policy provides the renter _liability_ coverage for when they are legally liable for _property damage_. If the home the renter rents just catches on fire and burns to the ground, the renters policy only provides the renter a defense as they are not legally liable. But if the renter _caused_ the home to burn down, the policy provides a defense in the form of a payment to the home owner.

I've provided a quote from a website explaining what coverage a renters policy provides. Feel free to search yourself to confirm this information.