Cross-lease unit insurance - any recent experiences?

Forums › Off topic › Cross-lease unit insurance - any recent experiences?

1 | 2

ANglEAUT

altered-ego
2476 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 871

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3485961 30-Apr-2026 20:51

Nobody so far has mentioned that you reread your cross-lease agreement. What does the agreement state about insurance? IMO, that agreement comes before an outside insurance company "imposes their will" on the block of 6 flats.

Take that agreement to a lawyer and get both a modern interpretation and what was implied / assumed at the time of writing the document.

FYI My cross-lease agreement is older than me & has zero amendments. YMMV

Please keep this GZ community vibrant by contributing in a constructive & respectful manner.

Wheelbarrow01

1802 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2700

Trusted

Chorus

#3485967 30-Apr-2026 22:33

Just to clarify, the other owner has not instantly lost his insurance because he did something wrong - his insurer has simply told him that when his current policy expires later this year, they will not renew it due to his unit being located in a "stacked" building - attached units next to and on top of each other. They will only do so on the basis that they get to insure the entire building.

Since his initial email yesterday, a second owner in the block has come forward to say that his own insurer (a different brand but under the same parent company as the other guy's insurer) has now also stated that they also will not renew his cover, and that his cover expires at the end of this week. This seems extraordinarily short notice for a change in underwriting policy. This well and truly raises some red flags for me, especially given the following paragraph.

The interesting thing is that the second owner has the same insurer as me. I called that insurer today to ask if they intend to decline my renewal later this year on the basis of a change to their underwriting policy/criteria. The agent said no, they are not changing their underwriting criteria for multi cross-lease units. This makes me think that the second unit owner's insurance issues are directly related to something they have done, or failed to do, such as non-disclosure.

I also spoke to a friend of a friend who works at a brokerage. She confirmed that yes - some insurers are choosing not to insure "stacked" units however the key words there are "some" and "choosing". She said there are still insurers who will gladly underwrite policies for individual units in cross-lease blocks, and while those insures may impose special terms, it is unlikely all insurers would close themselves off to this big of a market segment entirely. She also said cross-lease owners cannot be compelled to enter into a group policy against their will - and if the acid is being applied by their current insurer, the owner should vote with their feet.

I have advised the other owners in the block that I am happy to attend a meeting, listen to the broker's proposal and review the terms, but have let them know in no uncertain terms that if it doesn't suit me I won't be switching.

I've deliberately not named the insurers involved as I haven't yet spoken to them directly (except my own) and I want to hear exactly what they have to say before taking what I have been told second-hand as gospel. I'll update the thread when there are any developments.

geek3001

360 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 545

ID Verified

Subscriber

#3486060 1-May-2026 09:55

Just speculating...

I wonder if instances of insurers not wanting to insure cross lease properties may be related to the construction methods.

If a cross lease has two or more separate houses / home units on the shared land, then there may be no issue.

If a cross lease group of home units are all built together with reasonably fireproof shared walls made of solid brick or concrete, then there may be no issue.

If a cross lease group of home units are all built together with barely fireproof walls of timber framing and gib lined construction, then there could be issues.

There has been media coverage in recent years of a so-called ticking time bomb with older home units that are approaching or have exceeded someone's perceived service life, that were built in the 1970's or earlier using then-current building methods that might cause insurers to think twice about insuring those properties.

With increasing insurance costs, perhaps some insurers are looking for an excuse to walk away from insuring some properties. That would be a bad thing as that leaves the owners in a bind when they go looking elsewhere for insurance and are required to disclose the fact that they have been refused insurance by another insurer.

CokemonZ

1131 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 325

#3486069 1-May-2026 10:17

mortonman:

also bear in mind the excess is usually higher (to keep the cost down) and an individuals no claims history will be lost.

Not in my experience.

While the one insurer is insuring the whole building we have our own policies and own excesses (I choose to have a higher one than some of the others).

Someone alluded to an 8 year battle over larger claim earlier in the thread. IMO that seems to be the larger issue here.

May be different for apartment blocks, but for a fairly simple cross lease we weren't signing up as a big group, a bunch of individuals with the same company.

YMMV but it may not be the disaster it initially seems.

MichaelNZ

1617 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 496

Trusted

#3487188 4-May-2026 00:16

I would suggest not going into this too fixed in your position because there is a good chance yours will go the same way and then you will have to work with your neighbours.

I have recently shopped around on my commercial insurance and found switching could be worse. It will certainly be more expensive.

Also I would not read anything into the other unit's situation. All sorts of things happen with insurance policies.

By way of example my recent renewal included a bunch of added conditions related to running a restaurant. I am in the tech business so said conditions have nothing to do with me. I am having a meeting with them later today to hopefully sort it out.

1 | 2