Renewing your house insurance after 1 July will cost you

Changes to the Earthquake Commission’s EQCcover comes into effect on 1 July this year — but if you get in now you can possibly escape the price hikes, at least for the coming year.

With 1 July only days away, people with residential home or contents insurance (or residential cover as part of a policy) are advised to either budget for increasing costs or seek alternative quotes before 1 July — particularly if your policy is due for renewal in a month or two. To make use of the current rates, the policy will need to commence prior to the 1st July 2019.

The residential policy hikes are a result of the Government’s decision to remove the $20,000 EQCover for domestic contents (this now has to be covered solely by insurers even though the EQC levy prices — charged at 20c per $100 of cover — remain unchanged).

EQCover for domestic buildings will increase from $100,000 to $150,000 (ex GST). In the event of a natural disaster, insurers will cover losses above $150,000 (up to the policy sum insured), if required.

A comparison between the pre- and post 1 July 2019 levy changes for an Auckland, Hamilton and Rotorua address – based on the same criteria for all quotes ($400,000 home, 49 year old person, $50,000 contents and no previous claims) – reveals the unnecessary costs you would have to bear if you wait to renew after 1 July:


You may look at that and think ‘it’s only a $100 or so’ – but then again, that’s a dinner or night out with your favourite person. The difference is taking action now, or waiting for the changes to happen to you.

Did you know there is a Gvt. tax that only insurance policy holders must pay?

Did you know that if you have fire and general insurance policy, you are paying a levy that helps fund Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ)? It is a form of tax, which funds up to 95% of the public service – in reality it penalises policyholders for protecting their assets.

The Fire Emergency Levy has been criticised by insurance companies as grossly unfair, but the government recently announced that is would review the funding regime to hopefully find a more ‘stable, simple funding system’ that spreads the cost of the services ‘fairly among business and individuals’.

This from

“Applying a levy on insurance to pay for the fire service first came into effect in 1993, and since then, there have been well over a dozen reviews which have highlighted the pitfalls of that system,” Insurance Council of New Zealand (ICNZ) chief executive Tim Grafton told Insurance Business.

“One major problem is that it’s unfair, as it means that a public good provided to all New Zealanders is only paid for by those who insure themselves. That means there is a freeriding effect for those who don’t insure, as they still benefit from the service without having to make a contribution. There is no good rationale for doing this, especially since people who insure their homes in case of a fire will be put back on their feet by their insurer, and you are essentially penalising them for doing the right thing.”

Photo by Jeremy Bishop

Unoccupied properties not covered by insurance

Most household insurance policies say that if you leave your home “unoccupied” for a period of time, normally 30 or 60 days, then you will not be covered for certain “insured perils” (usually theft, attempted theft, malicious damage and escape of water).

A recent news report on the Stuff website has highlighted the issue of whether or not unoccupied homes are insured.

To see if you’re affected, give us a call on 0800 277 677.



Why liability loss may be your company’s worst nightmare

We all know that accidents happen – people, both employees and the public, get injured in the workplace – but what gives most people a shock is the massive implications and costs that can unfold as a result.

Bearing in mind that a workplace could be your home – it certainly is when an electrician or plumber, for example, comes on site – there are a number of pitfalls that can prove very costly in the long run (even resulting in prosecution for some).

Common mistakes many make include:

  • The limit of indemnity people were insured for was too low; and
  • The nature of activities that was disclosed when the proposal was done actually differed from what was claimed against.

For example, a company may start out manufacturing and distributing dog food. But the business morphs and evolves and soon a breeding centre or dog kennels are added. One day, somebody gets bitten, but the insurance company declines the claim because justifiably they can say, “No, we have you down for distributing dog food – we didn’t know you had dog kennels”.

This leaves the business facing huge costs in reparations, legal defence costs, loss of business reputation and fines and penalties (some of which you can’t insure against).

For a good example of the cost that liability can inflict on a business, let’s look to the hospitality sector.

In a recent true story, the manager of a bar failed to ask an underage drinker for their identification (this was during the Christmas season). The result was a $1,000 fine and the café was closed for three days. The Bar manager’s license was revoked for 28 days – this is all standard.

It’s normal business practise in the hospitality industry to ‘borrow’ the neighbour’s bar manager to act as a locum bar manager. However, because it was the busy period, the bar couldn’t find a locum manager and had to remain closed over the Christmas period.

The business lost more than $55,000 worth of turnover and income over their busiest period. If their business had liability, consequential loss cover and statutory liability (to help with the fine and penalty), they would have been okay.

Bear in mind that cost is not a factor. One million dollars of statutory liability cover could cost you as little as $276 (including GST) per year – it is dependent on the nature of the business, number of employees, turnover, etc. but it is not expensive cover to have!

The problem is not the cost of the insurance, or what goes wrong, but the cost to the business – a health and safety investigation is bad enough – which includes reparations, penalties, fines and loss of reputation could cripple the business.

Photo by: Kyryll Ushakov

Insurer rushes to Edgecombe family’s aid

Bad news stories and controversial headlines always get lots of legs, particularly stories about insurance claims, but here’s a good news story of how AMP Insurance went above and beyond for a family, with lots of young children, after the recent floods in Edgecombe, in the Bay of Plenty. 

The large family lives just outside of town, about a kilometre from where the Rangitāiki River breached a stopbank. The family had no time to grab anything when they fled – ‘Mum’ (let’s call her that) had her phone, but no charger. Other than that, they literally had just the clothes on their backs when the floods came.

I actually lodged the claim on behalf of this client because she was trying to preserve the battery life of her phone. The family did manage to book into two rooms of a hotel, which cost about $500 per night – a cost that was covered by the accommodation clause in their insurance to a limit of $30,000 or 12 months.

The flooding however was extensive and it soon became apparent that they would not be able to move back into their house for some time. Flood waters had risen more than 30 centimetres up the walls inside their home, bearing in mind that when you factor in the pilings, we’re talking about levels well over a metre or so.

The family, not wanting to be cooped up in a hotel for who knows how long, asked AMP Insurance if they could buy a caravan, and have the accommodation allowance cover the first three or four instalments until they could get back on their feet. The insurer said ‘no’.

Instead, they advanced the family the entire $30,000 accommodation allowance upfront so that they could buy the caravan cash, a measure that would provide more certainty and security for the family in owning the caravan outright.

When I visited the house, the bottom half of all the inside walls had been cut away by the builders and many of the household items – not all – were write-offs. The assessor reached the same conclusion and arranged for an immediate payment of the entire household cover of more than $80,000.

The family car was also under water, and the family was quickly paid out for this too.

Of course, customers always have an expectation – justifiably so – that the insurer will come to the party quickly and fairly, but there are processes that have to be followed to ensure legal and responsible management of money.

What was exceptional here, was how the insurer put the customer first and went out of their way to act speedily in finding a solution that was right for the client, rather than being too bound by policy and bureaucracy – a family was in need, and they stepped up.

It was a case of putting the customer’s interests ahead of the company.

Kudos to the family as well, because they had the right cover in place to ensure against just an unexpected event. As a result, it was a lot less traumatic than it could have been.

The ins-and-outs of car insurance in New Zealand

About cars, insurance and learner drivers in NZ

If you find yourself scratching your head over the complexities of motor vehicle insurance, you’re not alone. However, making sure that you have the correct ‘nominations’ and details correct on your policy is essential if you don’t want to find yourself out of pocket when something does go wrong.

Car insurance is really simple with the biggest cost variations being around the age and driving history of the driver and the demographic region where the car will be kept. Vehicle insurance can be summed up as;

  • Comprehensive insurance;
  • Third party, fire and theft insurance; and
  • Third party.

1. Vehicle insurance for drivers over 25 years of age

If you and any drivers of the car are over 25 years of age, then this is your category. Your basic excess will be around the $300-$400 mark (depending on the Insurer). Nominating over 25 year old drivers and excluding under 25 year old drivers will generally trigger the most discounts and reduce the cost.

b. Open driver insurance:

If you are the nominated driver, you can opt for an open driver insurance policy if, for example, your children are learning to drive or using the vehicle from time-to-time. In this case, the premium remains the same, but there will be an additional excess if the under 25 year old driver has an accident.

Notify your insurer and change your policy if your children have started learning to drive using the vehicle.

2. Vehicle insurance as it applies to an under-25-year-old MAIN driver

If you are the main driver and aged under 25, your premiums won’t generally be pretty and in some instances, insurers may even decline to insure the specific car! For example, a 17 year old main driver of a turbo Subaru may battle to get insurance with most of the main insurers.

Most drivers in this category, will opt for third party, fire and theft vehicle insurance because the premiums can be horrendous. As an example, $180 or more a month for a car on full/comprehensive insurance (and an excess around the $1,000 mark), compared to third party, fire & theft insurance premiums starting at about $40 per month.

And that’s the sum of a very brief outline on how car insurance works.

The thing that catches a lot of people happens when their children start learning to drive. Ordinarily owners will be paying comprehensive car insurance for over-25s, and forget to shift to an ‘open driver policy’ when their kids start taking driving lessons.

Keeping your vehicle safe is all about being aware, on the road and on the insurance front.

Note to parents: Make sure that you do not nominate yourself as the main driver when in fact your under 25-year-old son or daughter is the regular driver. The insurance companies do investigate and they do come down hard on people who try to outsmart the system.

Photo: PBy Amos Bar-Zeev,

The insurance cost of earthquakes and procrastination

Does procrastination undermine wealth?

After the recent earthquakes and aftershocks across the centre of New Zealand and a subsequent embargo by most insurers, we were inundated with people wanting to increase their sum insured and contents insurance – of course, by then it was too late.

For example, one of my prospective clients had been given a quote for home insurance on her new property early in October. All quotes are valid for thirty days, but it was only post the earthquake that the client got back to me about implementing the policy. Unfortunately, by then, an embargo on all insurance was in place.

Soon after the earthquakes most insurers placed an embargo on all new insurance policies and alterations to existing policies that covered easily half of New Zealand, from Christchurch to the Bay of Plenty. Initially, even car, boat and bike insurance policies were put on hold, but gradually lifted later.

The existing embargo – which has since shrunk to include most of the top of the South Island and up to just north of Wellington – allows existing policy owners to transfer their insurance policies to a new property or rentals. In other words, you can take your existing insurer’s policy with you, but can’t take out a new one with a new Insurer.

For example, if you are buying a house, the vendor can transfer his or her sum insured policy over to you – OR they can take it with them – provided that the amount remains the same as what they insured the property for. So if the vendor had $400,000 sum insured, you can pick up the $400,000 policy, provided you meet the underwriters terms and conditions. You may not increase the value of the policy, even if you believe the previous owners undervalued.

Be sure to find out from the seller if they are also buying in an embargo zone as well – if they are, they may be looking to transfer their own policy to the new address (if the property that they are purchasing e.g. does not have insurance). If they transfer their current policy to the new address and if you do not have a current Home Building policy in the embargo zone, that may leave you exposed and unable to arrange insurance on your purchase!

However, if you already have an existing policy, you may be able to take it with you to the new property. If you are in the process of having a house built, you may be able to ask the builder’s contract works Insurer to convert that to a Sum Insured Replacement policy for you.

If you have purchased an existing property in the embargo zone, make sure that you are kept informed if there is and EQC claim on the property. You would not want any pay-out to go to the vendor, who has long since left the property, while you sit with the damages. Ensure your lawyer and mortgage broker are on to this.

The most salient lesson we can learn from all of this? Be insured, be insured for the right value and don’t procrastinate.

Six steps landlords should take to protect their rentals from meth contamination


Tenancy Practice Service director, Scotney Williams LLB, recently told AMP insurers that it is better to have a clause in the tenancy agreement that says the tenant agrees not to possess, use, buy or have on the premises any unlawful drugs.

“If the tenant breaches that clause, the landlord can issue a 14-day ‘cease and desist’ notice under section 56 of the RTA (which deals with the process a landlord must follow to remedy breaches of the agreement or the RTA itself),” he said.

If there is a breach of the law around recreational drugs, like smoking cannabis, the landlord has to issue a 14-day notice to the tenant to get rid of the cannabis because small quantities aren’t necessarily enough legal reason to eject the tenant.

Methamphetamine is much more serious. Cooking P or using it on a property causes substantial damage which is difficult to remedy – that’s ample reason to terminate the tenancy.

“If you have evidence of methamphetamine use or production on the rental property you should take a photograph of the evidence, which you can use if you go to the Tenancy Tribunal seeking termination over the possession and use of methamphetamine,” Mr Williams said.

Five tips to reduce the risk of meth contamination on rental properties

  1. Establish a baseline moving forward by testing property for methamphetamine before new tenants move in – every time;
  2. Do more than a credit check on tenants. The situation is serious enough to warrant full background checks;
  3. Include a clause in the tenancy agreement that prohibits the use, sale or production of drugs on the property;
  4. Make sure the tenancy agreement has a clause that lets the landlord test for methamphetamine during standard property inspections (with or without an expert);
  5. Ensure you employ reliable testing methods;
  6. Carry out regular property inspections.

HSWA 2015: What are the absolute minimum insurances tradies should have?

The new Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 casts a wide net and in my opinion, all business owners should at a bare minimum have Public Liability, Statutory Liability and – where the company has staff – Employers Liability cover.

What is public liability insurance?

Public liability policies protect businesses (and other bodies like sports clubs) from claims for compensation when unexpected, and unintended personal injury or property damage arises out of the business’s activities.

What is statutory liability insurance?

Statutory liability policies protect people or businesses (and other bodies like sports clubs) when they unintentionally breach New Zealand Acts of Parliament and covers things like defence costs, legally allowable fine and reparations – for example, those arising from breaches of the HSWA 2015. Conditions certainly apply of course and not all elements may be covered

What is Employer’s liability insurance?

It’s true that ACC does cover a lot of costs arising from workplace injuries or work-related illnesses, but there are some things that ACC won’t cover. An employer will need to have covered in place to protect the business from claims for work-related accidents that ACC doesn’t cover.

When it comes to trades people, the limit of indemnity (the sum insured) is very dependent on a few factors:

1. Do you work in the commercial/business sector or the domestic/residential market?

The assumption is that how much you’re insured for will be higher if you work in the commercial/business sector. Although, for those working in the higher value residential sector, a higher limit of indemnity should be considered!

2. Are there any contractual requirements that suppliers/clients have of the tradesperson?

For example, a tradesperson may need $5million NZD public liability cover, but they may want to do work for a city council or any government department. In that case, the will find that the contractual requirement may differ from what they have.

Some major corporates require $10 million NZD public liability cover from their contractors.

3. What are the risks associated with your trade?

The services you offer – and in what context – could also play a role in determining the limit of liability cover that you may need.

For example, if you are a gardener or landscaper who does work for the council in parks and gardens, you may be required to have the standard $250,000 limit for Forest & Rural Fire Acts cover under the public liability policy.

However, a gardener or landscaper who works in rural areas, may have a requirement to have Forest & Rural Fires Act cover of e.g. $500k to $1mil.

4. What tools and equipment do you use?

Tradespeople may have also had insurance needs when it comes to the equipment and tools of the trade, whether that equipment travels with you to the site (and not to forget the vehicle that transports the tools and equipment).

5. Do you sub-contract specialist roles to other trades?

Some tradespeople who are Licenced Building Practitioners (LBP’s) should also consider additional cover to protect themselves in the role of a PCBU (person conducting a business or undertaking).

6. Are there any legal or specific requirements of your profession?

Some liability insurance policies have extra ‘tick-boxes’ or benefits applicable to certain occupations. For example, an additional cover is required by those in the motor trade who are licenced to issue a Warrant of Fitness.

Total Disaster: Most Kiwi homeowners may be unable to rebuild if their property gets destroyed. Are you making the same mistake?

If your house insurance at least matches the market value of your home, you should be covered in the event of a disaster like fire, flood or earthquake – right? Well no, because the cost of replacing your home may
well be much higher than the sale value of your house.

Following the Canterbury earthquakes, New Zealand insurance companies moved to a sum insured regime, which essentially means that you specify what you want your insurance company to pay if your home is totally destroyed or badly damaged. The problem is that there is no guarantee that the sum insured will be sufficient to cover the costs of rebuilding your home.

Prosper’s Auckland Fire and General Manager, Stewart Wright, talks to the Insurance Council of New Zealand’s Operations Manager, Terry Jordan, about why so many Kiwi homeowners are at risk of under-insurance when it comes to their homes.

Should I base my insurance cover on the market value of my property?

“I would totally ignore the cost price, rating valuation and market valuation of a property because they are irrelevant – use them to choose your lotto numbers. They have nothing to do with the cost of replacing your property.”

What are the risks of total loss and what does it mean exactly?

“Here in New Zealand, a total loss would most likely be due to a volcanic eruption or earthquake – as we saw in Canterbury – and possibly a tsunami. Total loss from a flood, windstorm or tornado is less likely.”

What are Kiwis getting wrong when it comes to sum insured?

“Most homeowners are underestimating the extras they will be required to pay for in the event of total loss because people look purely at their house, and ignore things like outbuildings, fences, driveways, paths, decks and infrastructure services like sewerage, storm water drains and power.

“Our Canterbury experience tells us these additional factors add significantly to the overall cost. The homeowner is responsible for replacing anything from the house through to the boundary – and for some through the boundary to the middle of the road. The homeowner may well be liable for costs such as traffic control and digging up the road.”

Why are Kiwis getting it wrong?

“A lack of understanding about what has to be paid for in the event of a total loss is an issue. It’s also cheaper to go with the default sum insured put forward by the insurer when all the default sum was meant to be was a starting measure. And there’s the attitude of ‘it will never happen to me’.

“At this stage there has been no evidence of an underinsurance issue because there has been no total loss scenario since the sum insured regime began. Total loss through fire normally leaves things like the driveway, fences and foundations intact. But you just need to look at what happened to Christchurch to realise that total loss could happen to you – for a few dollars more, it isn’t worth the risk.

Does this mean that New Zealander’s need to move on from default sum insured?

“When insurers switched over to sum insured, they sent everybody a default sum insured. Effectively they said to everyone that ‘you must choose what you need to insure for, but here is a start’.

“That was five years ago when most insurers applied a rebuild cost of $2,000 per square metre and added on a bit for debris removal. A large percentage of people accepted that default, but it is important that they take the next step and establish accurately what level of cover they need.

“If you haven’t moved beyond default sum insured, then it is time for you to take a serious look.”

What steps should New Zealand homeowners take to make sure they are properly insured?

“There is an ascending scale of actions you could take

“Step One: Accept or remain with the default sum insured that your insurer is probably increasing each year (by about 3 or 4 per cent depending on the level of building inflation).

“Step Two: Use the calculator on your insurer’s website to price the replacement value of your home. You will need to measure your home to establish details like the size of your kitchen.

“Get a tape measure out and do some work because it is your biggest investment. Your insurer’s calculator will give you a cost to rebuild your home, as well as factoring in the cost to demolish what remains of the old home, remove the debris, pay for infrastructure services and cover off professional fees like engineering, Geotech and architects. The calculator will also add one year’s inflation to the sum.

“Option three: Hire a property valuer who can give you a figure. The Insurance Council has been working with valuers who now have a good idea of what to do. It’s a lot less work than using the calculator, but it will cost approximately $500 or $600. You can have a high level of confidence that this sum will be accurate.

“Option four: Hire a quantity surveyor, who is more expensive than a property valuer, but he or she will be able to give you a breakdown of your property and the costs involved in each of the areas. This equates to a high level of confidence in your replacement cost.”

Should everybody be using a valuer or a quantity surveyor?

“If you have a standard square box house on a section – which is pretty much half of most houses in New Zealand – you can be fairly confident with the sum supplied by your insurer’s calculator

“However, if you have unusual design features, an architect designed home, or you’re located on a difficult site – for example, a remote location, hilly section or narrow access way (any obstacles that will contribute to increasing the cost of a rebuilding) – then go to a property valuer or quantity surveyor.

The Home Owner’s Guide to Fire and General Insurance in New Zealand

Learn how a lot of problems can be avoided with proper planning and a few extra dollars.

Check your email to complete your free claim!