I recently bought a house and my fiancée lives with me, how do we handle home insurance?

Submitted by twy314 t3_yhraxd in personalfinance

I am the only one on the deed and bought the house solely in my name. My fiancée and I are not planning to get married until at least 2 more years so I want to make sure we do the right thing to protect both of us.

I know she would not be covered under the insurance, but would she need to be? Her parents live in the same state and she goes back and forth. Because of that her permanent address is still her parents. Does that mean she is still covered under their insurance?

Furthermore I know this would mean her “stuff” would not be covered under the insurance. That said, what counts as her stuff? Many of the more expensive items such as furniture, nice clothes, electronics, etc. I purchased with my money. She has said before that if we were to separate she would not be taking any of it (for one reason or another). Does that mean it’s still mine and would be covered?

In general should I be adding my fiancée to my home insurance policy as additional member coverage?

1

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

93195 t1_iufc6v6 wrote

Your policy covers the stuff in the house, up to your policy’s limits for personal effects.

It provides no coverage for her personally, if you mean life, liability, health, or something like that. Her parent’s homeowners insurance doesn’t either.

Homeowners covers the house and the stuff in it, up to policy limits. It doesn’t all have to be your stuff.

10

LegallyIncorrect t1_iug1g3a wrote

This isn’t entirely true. My homeowners covers slips and falls and other things like that so there is some coverage beyond personal effects. And sometimes you need a rider because there may be caps on certain types of coverage.

1

93195 t1_iug3rtc wrote

It covers your liability for slips and falls when someone gets hurt and sues you. The coverage is protecting the homeowner from the person that slipped and fell, not the person who slipped and fell.

1

LegallyIncorrect t1_iug3wwn wrote

As a lawyer I appreciate your explanation. You don’t have to be sued to trigger coverage. And as it pays for medical bills for injuries at the residence, it’s still beneficial for the person injured. In that sense, it protects anyone who may be present in the home.

1

93195 t1_iug45vt wrote

I’d compare it to car insurance. Sure. It covers the property of the person whose car you damaged. To prevent you and your insurance company from getting sued. It still doesn’t make it the other party’s coverage.

1

LegallyIncorrect t1_iug49jt wrote

It also doesn’t make it limited to the property of the policy holder. The original comment is incorrect as it implied coverage for only personal effects.

1

93195 t1_iug4hhe wrote

Let me rephrase. It covers the homeowner. Property, liability, etc. Damage to others’ person and property is covered because the homeowner is liable for it.

1

Annonymouse100 t1_iufnd02 wrote

I would have her get a separate renters insurance policy.

There are a number of benefits to this. The cost of renters insurance is very reasonable, deductibles are usually much less, and it won’t impact your homeowners insurance rates for small claims through renters insurance. You would never want to make a claim for a $1500 stolen bicycle on your homeowners insurance (and risk cost prohibitive rate increases and have to pay a 1k+ deductible), but for $120 a year in premiums and a $100 deductible your girlfriend/tenant could it her bike replaced under her renters insurance. Little claims that that can more than make it worth her carrying her own coverage.

2

WizardDresden2192 t1_iufch3z wrote

I would just add her. Review your policy language but good chance she wouldn't be covered if something happened. She is living there part time and it'll make things a lot easier if something happens (fire, storm, water damage, etc etc). Depending on the company you can even do a self quote online to see if adding her to the policy makes any difference in premium (sometimes, there is a "married" discount baked into some companies rate system).

−1

321_reddit t1_iufjga8 wrote

Most insurance companies require your marriage to be legally recognized for any spousal discounts to apply.

0

WizardDresden2192 t1_iufk9zt wrote

Not true at all. For married discount I've never been asked for documentation. When I worked as a producer it was never required. Some may depend on state laws, but I doubt it. Other, more serious discounts like a new roof discount require documention.

0

321_reddit t1_iufl3u9 wrote

It’s highly dependent on state law then. Where do you primarily write policies?

I experienced this issue first hand 10 years ago when attempting to combine insurance policies with my then boyfriend now husband. A very well meaning insurance agent attempted to record us as “married” even though Nebraska didn’t recognize same sex marriage. She later had to rewrite all of our policies because underwriting flagged it. The insurance companies in NE were using state law and applying it to their rates.

1

WizardDresden2192 t1_iuft0ub wrote

I wrote in OH but that was several years ago. If something was very obvious or there were state laws as what constitutes marriage then yes, uw will flag or decline that policy or discount. But, generally speaking especially since op is engaged, I don't think it would cause any issues.

1

Hfx123 t1_iufbwxr wrote

Home insurance typically extends to family members within the home. No need to add them. This is a question for your broker. You are likely common law if such a thing exists where you live, therefore, she is a family member

−2

321_reddit t1_iufjbkc wrote

Common law marriage is limited to 9 states (really 8). NH is for estate purposes only. RI is the asterisk. It’s legality is tenuous at best. The only way to record a common law marriage there is to appear before a family court judge who is sympathetic towards the concept of common law marriage. see here

1