Public Liability Insurance for a Private Property

IPYF on 24/05/2025 - 13:24

Short story is that we've inherited a 'house' and land that needs to be cleared in due course, but this needs to be planned and scheduled as we've just taken over as administrators (and it'll of course take time to get done)

There's no point in getting property insurance itself because there's nothing there of value. But, all buildings on the property are complete death traps (eg. biohazards and high risk buildings like badly damaged shipping containers, flimsy sheds that could collapse, and the 'house' itself could fall down if someone as much as pissed against it).

Resultingly we're worried that if someone decides to get in and squat, or goes in to case the place to burgle the ephemera there, that we're going to wind up liable for anything bad that happens to them; so we've been looking into public liability insurance just to protect ourselves; but seemingly insurance companies only seem to offer it to businesses - and not private customers.

Does anyone know what the most appropriate insurance option would be in this situation, or have any recommendations for a company that'll just do a 'cover your asssss' policy?

Thanks in advance.

Home & Garden Insurance

Comments

  • ihbh on 24/05/2025 - 13:31
    +7

    If it's too hard, get the lowest sum insured possible (might need to explain to customer service staff). The public liability cover is still fixed at $10m or whatever it is.

    Perhaps try a broker as well (to explore retail and business cover).

    • eftpos on 25/05/2025 - 15:22

      This is the best idea. Legitimate people such as tradies need to be protected, especially if the property is in poor condition. They'll have their own insurance who could then come after you. You could have a fire on the property so you want to be protected in case people fighting the fire are injured or the fire spreads and damages a neighbour's property. It's unlikely you'll ever need to use the insurance but it's worth taking out for peace of mind and in case the unforeseen happens.

  • mskeggs on 24/05/2025 - 13:47
    +3

    Call a broker and explain.
    You might throw them a bone to handle your next home insurance etc. renewal.
    They charge about 10% of the premium, likely to be a small fee to save the hassle of sorting out this specific case, and in my experience usually pay for themselves in savings if it isn't a very vanilla policy.

  • Euphemistic on 24/05/2025 - 13:48

    Is it really necessary? Anyone who is there will be there illegally. Tradies should have their own insurance. unless you want to cover yourself and relatives at clean up time?

    Better insurance might be temporary fencing to make sure people know to keep out.

    • mskeggs on 24/05/2025 - 13:56
      +2

      If somebody sues you because they got a nail in their foot for $5000 you will spend more than that defending it, even if you win day one.

      I personally would take the chance, but i can see an argument to pay for insurance.

      • arkie0 on 24/05/2025 - 15:03
        -1

        That scenario can occur at any house and not everyone has public liability insurance

        • mskeggs on 24/05/2025 - 15:46
          +2

          Of course. But it is included in home insurance, so if you are insured you don’t need to seek additional insurance.
          OP isn’t asking if insurance is a good idea, presumably they have adequate insurance elsewhere, and are concerned about a new, decrepit property.

      • 87percent on 24/05/2025 - 17:28
        +3

        It’s (profanity) ridiculous that that can actually happen. Someone is illegally on your property, and get injured, it’s your fault??

        What are we, the USA??

    • IPYF on 24/05/2025 - 14:37

      It's mainly for the peace of mind of the primary administrator, who is elderly, and is losing sleep over the potentiality of something bad happening. Objectively necessary or not he'll feel better if he's covered which is why I'm investigating it for him.

  • Drakesy on 24/05/2025 - 14:01
    +2

    You'd have to be proven negligent to actually be sued though.
    Owning a property that isn't on public land and a squatter setting up shop there would not necessarily fall on the owner.

    I'd say your defence in that the property is currently in the hands of administrators and that you have plans to clear/demolish it should easily fall in your favour

    Doing nothing isn't a defence, however taking actions to minimise/remove the hazards can be.
    *not legal advice.

    • elgrande on 24/05/2025 - 20:45
      -1

      *not legal advice

      Thats for sure

    • SlickMick on 25/05/2025 - 09:40

      If I read OP correctly, they are the administrator. So when you say "in administrator's hands", you're throwing OP under the bus rather than giving them a defence. ("In their hands" = responsibility)
      Also, OP taking actions to minimise/ remove risk would acknowledge awareness of the risk, so there goes any possibility of a "couldn't have known the risk" defence??(Clearly what they did to minimise failed if there is an incident, proving negligence??)
      Transferring risk to an insurer seems prudent to me.

      Also not a lawyer.

      • IPYF on 25/05/2025 - 15:46
        +1

        I'm the son of the administrator who has put me in charge of investigating the practicalities (he's elderly). If something goes wrong he'd be sued, but more's to the point he's worried about the possibility and I don't want him to be; so a small outlay to make lawsuit implausible just seems a sensible step.

  • Downvoter on 24/05/2025 - 14:09
    -4

    I had to google ephemera and still not sure why it was used.

    • IPYF on 24/05/2025 - 14:38
      +1

      As an example there's like 40 large boxes of mouldy remote control car magazines, and that's the tip of the cancer-encrusted iceberg.

    • SlickMick on 25/05/2025 - 09:41
      +2

      me too. Apparently they've made a word for people like me who can't throw anything away.

  • JIMB0 on 24/05/2025 - 14:09
    +1

    Put up a fence and a "DANGER - DO NOT ENTER" sign to protect yourself. If anyone gets hurt after ignoring the sign and jumping the fence they can hardly say they weren't warned.

      • JIMB0 on 24/05/2025 - 20:59

        Yeah, I later realised that comment was in bad taste, so I deleted it. Perhaps you could do the same with half your comments. Would really clean the place up.

  • m1108 on 24/05/2025 - 15:14
    +1

    Yes get public liability. Even if someone is trespassing they can still sue you. Not affiliated at all, but if you’re in Victoria, CN Botting in Moorabbin are great. Have used them plenty of times for this type of thing

  • shadyscab on 25/05/2025 - 08:23
    +2

    You can insure contents with budget direct - their minimum cover is something like 30k and they comes with 10 or 20 million liability insurance for around $400/year.

    Put some cheap/dumb timer switches on lamps at night, leave some old boots at the front door and keep the driveway and mailbox clear and you shouldn’t have issues with squatters.

    • IPYF on 25/05/2025 - 15:44

      Thanks. This is looking like a decent option.

    • kiitos on 26/05/2025 - 14:02

      Does that cover unoccupied properties?

  • 2esc on 25/05/2025 - 09:24

    Has it got good fencing on the front of the property? Security fence panels ive seen at times for about $30 a panel(feet not included) may be a option. Clear signs stating private property do not enter. But you really do need advice if you have just taken over ask your solicitor legal advice for the situation.

    • IPYF on 25/05/2025 - 15:48

      Nah and there's no point front-fencing it. It's rural and side fences (not owned by us) could be vaulted easily. The lawyer said 'get public liability insurance' which is the purpose of the post.

  • Muppet Detector on 26/05/2025 - 17:19

    Another vote for the fence option.

    We were taught to secure abandoned properties to erect tall wire fences with any gates/openings secured by chains/locks etc

    Barbed wire on top was optional.

    Flood lighting was optional

    But multiple high visibility signs declaring "private property", "trespassers will be prosecuted" "no entry" etc

    Jury is out on whether you create signage alerting someone to "danger" or "caution" type warnings as sometimes this is seen as an admission/acknowledgement that you are aware of those dangers.

    Might be worthwhile seeking some real legal guidance.

    Unfortunately, the onus is on you to keep people out rather than rely on people not entering illegally. Even if their entry is illegal, if a trespasser becomes injured (or does ) owner may still be liable if he hasn't done "what a reasonable person in the circumstances" would do to restrict others from entry.

    This extends to your legal requirement to make any repairs necessary to restore/ maintain integrity of the fence.

    Many cases of negligence where miscreants cut holes in fence to gain unlawful entry but then owner didn't repair fence creating easy access for next miscreant and exposure to harm.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join