The residential building insurance sometimes has considerable gaps

Berlin. Whether fire, tap water damage or storm: residential building insurance should ensure that in the worst case homeowners do not remain empty. However, older contracts in particular often have gaps, criticizes the Stiftung Warentest in its magazine "Finanztest" (issue 3/2021).

Residential building insurance with elementary protection

of 178 tariffs tested without a deductible 79 failed as "poor". 68, on the other hand, achieved "very good"; These are usually premium tariffs. Some important points should be taken into account when signing a new contract and the review of existing contracts. The Stiftung Warentest, for example, recommends that you in any case be taken up in a residential building insurance with elementary protection.

This additional protection becomes effective in the case of natural hazards. Even if avalanches and earthquakes only affect certain regions, the risk of heavy rain is often underestimated. Many tariffs offer elementary protection for less than 100 euros per year, and it is higher in risk areas. Since this addition is usually not automatically included, homeowners should also complete it.

Performance reduction with gross negligence

With gross negligence there are often gaps in cover. Many insurers may shorten the benefits or even cancel if the damage has been caused grossly negligent, for example if the candle was unattended before a fire.

"Finanztest" only recommends contracts that do without it. Attention also with the small print: here the liability for gross negligence is sometimes significantly limited.

Other absolutely necessary services are demolition and renovation costs, for example after a fire, as well as transport and storage costs. Current official building regulations and decontaminations should also be taken into account. Overvoltages should also be covered because a lightning strike on a power line can cause expensive damage to the electronics in the house.

The magazine lists further useful additional services, including, for example, smoke and soot damage, expert costs, hotel costs, vehicle impact or drain pipes. However, housing protection letters are not worthwhile from the perspective of “Finanztest”. They cost money unnecessarily and offer little help.