I’m retired and live on social security only, so in other words, tight budget. I own a 50x10 mobile home that is in a trailer park. The assessed value is only $3000. But the contents of the house and garage are in the neighborhood of $35000. Insurance on mobile homes is quite costly and it wouldn’t take too long before I will have paid more then the trailer it’s self is worth. On the other hand renters insurance is about 1/3 the cost of home owners.
So since I do rent the space in the trailer park that my home sits on could I be covered for the contents under a renters policy? Or would some catch 22 come around to bite me since I own the place?
why not ask your insurance agent?
Disclaimer: I am not an insurance agent.
My understanding is that renter’s insurance typically only covers your personal possessions (i.e., your furniture, your computer, your clothing, etc.), and may also extend to things that happen to your personal possessions when outside of the dwelling that you’re renting (such as if your bicycle is stolen while it’s parked at the library). As I understand it, it does not usually provide any coverage to the dwelling itself.
So, yes, it’d cover “the contents,” but not the mobile home itself, but there’s the question of whether an insurance company would be willing to write you such a policy when you aren’t renting your actual dwelling.
I’m also assuming that you own the mobile home outright (i.e, you don’t have an outstanding loan on it); if that’s not the case, then your lender might also have something to say on the matter, and demand that the home be insured while the loan is in effect (in much the same way that mortgage lenders demand that a mortgage home is covered by insurance).
So, yeah, talk to your insurance agent.
I used to sell the stuff. Kenobi’s got the nuts n bolts of it. Renters is contents and liability coverage, Homeowners (including mobile) is contents, liability and dwelling. There’s small differences and details, but based on what you’re looking for a renter’s policy will do.
I have no dog in this fight, but I’m just curious. Is assessed value the only metric that is useful in determining the utility of homeowners insurance in this case? Wouldn’t homeowners insurance be designed to “make you whole” in the case of your property being destroyed? Assessed value might not mean that it only would take $3000 for you to be living in a comparable place again (whether that means purchasing something else or having the home rebuilt).
I think when we got homeowners insurance it took a lot more into account than just the assessed value: they looked at what it would cost to rebuild a house in our particular area and the like.
But there’s more to it than that. Insurers set rates based on a category of risk. If you’re not a renter by the insurance company’s definition, you can’t buy a renter’s policy just because you only want the same kind of coverage that a renter’s policy usually covers. OP wants a policy that clearly states that it covers mobile homes and his circumstances (owns trailer, rents lot), contents & liability only.
I also wonder if OP is comparing apples to apples. Mobile homes are an unusual risk with specialized insurance. OP, when you say a renter’s policy is 1/3 the price are you comparing to a renter’s policy for a mobile home?
This article seems to indicate that what you’re looking for does exist:
Price and availability are probably quite dependent on where you are.
It sounds like those are for people who are renting a mobile home; the OP is renting the land that his home is on, but he owns the actual home itself.