• filter:
  • Page :
  • 1
  • Text Only
  • Search this Topic »
Voting History
rated:
My husband and I own our home.  We are both on the deed, but only he is on the loan as a borrower.  Can his lender dictate who gets listed on our hazard insurance policy???  We were told that only His name can be placed, as he is the borrower.  My argument is that we are BOTH owners and should both be insured, rightfully. 

Thank you!
 

Member Summary
Staff Summary
Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

rated:
They're being an a**.  The only thing they should care about that the policy has the correct address of the property to be insured. Tell them that you'll file a complaint with CFPB.
 

rated:
Why do you care?

Take a look at your policy.  Mine (with State Farm) states the following:

  • “You” and “your” mean the “named insured” shown in the Declarations. Your spouse is included if a resident of your household.

Also this:

  • “insured” means you and, if residents of your household: a. your relatives; and b. any other person under the age of 21 who is in the care of a person described above.


 

rated:
Is this a new loan that you are getting (technically he is getting) or is this a loan that is already in place and they are giving you trouble abount adding your name to the policy?

IF you are getting a new loan: Are you deeding off title and then back on as part of the transaction? Or are you being kept in title during the transaction as a "non-obligated co-owner" of the property (or some such verbiage)? If you are staying on title through this transaction then you are probably going to have to sign the security instrument, and the lender shouldn't have a problem with you being named in the policy. (That is the way this would be done in my state).

rated:
Usually, as long as the lender is named on the policy they shouldn't care who is primary insured. At least in my experience, I've had a policy with the borrower, AND relative of borrower on policy, and lender named, as, well, the lender.

Lender's main priority usually is and should be that in the event of a total loss, lender is paid first or at least has a say on where the check goes.

rated:
mwarrior said:   Usually, as long as the lender is named on the policy they shouldn't care who is primary insured. At least in my experience, I've had a policy with the borrower, AND relative of borrower on policy, and lender named, as, well, the lender.

Lender's main priority usually is and should be that in the event of a total loss, lender is paid first or at least has a say on where the check goes.

I think the concern would be more about the liability coverage rather than the property coverage, but as I pointed out above, the OP is likely insured by virtue of her being married to the insured and a member of the household.  There's no need to have her as a named insured on the policy in order for the coverage to extend to her.  It's a good question that never occurred to me, but my daughter just turned 18, so it is nice to see the language in the policy.  

rated:
dcwilbur said:   
mwarrior said:   Usually, as long as the lender is named on the policy they shouldn't care who is primary insured. At least in my experience, I've had a policy with the borrower, AND relative of borrower on policy, and lender named, as, well, the lender.

Lender's main priority usually is and should be that in the event of a total loss, lender is paid first or at least has a say on where the check goes.

I think the concern would be more about the liability coverage rather than the property coverage, but as I pointed out above, the OP is likely insured by virtue of her being married to the insured and a member of the household.  There's no need to have her as a named insured on the policy in order for the coverage to extend to her.  It's a good question that never occurred to me, but my daughter just turned 18, so it is nice to see the language in the policy.  

  
True, but even if the wording didn't list OP as insured (for whatever reason) and OP was on title and wanted her name on the policy, there shouldn't be a reason for the lender to say "no only the borrower can be listed on the policy regardless who the owner on title is". That's like auto insurers requiring the insurance policy to list only the borrower, and refusing policies that insure the drive plus a family member or a friend on the same policy. Makes no sense as the lender's interest is protected.

  • Quick Reply:  Have something quick to contribute? Just reply below and you're done! hide Quick Reply
     
    Click here for full-featured reply.


Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2016