OLA in the News: Do Renters Need Insurance?

Message
Author
Openborders
Posts: 31
Joined: August 18th, 2011, 12:58 pm

Re: OLA in the News: Do Renters Need Insurance?

#26 Unread post by Openborders » August 18th, 2011, 8:55 pm

former advertiser wrote:
We don't need to justify this any further.
It's not over at all. I don't want to sound rude but people here have to decide whether they want this forum to have true information or be a propaganda landlord love in with misinformation being dinner and tenant bashing as dessert.

Openborders
Posts: 31
Joined: August 18th, 2011, 12:58 pm

Re: OLA in the News: Do Renters Need Insurance?

#27 Unread post by Openborders » August 18th, 2011, 8:58 pm

c0ntra wrote: Agreed. Even the dreaded Toronto Star agrees with you. As much as I hate the star, they've tried to educate tenants through at least 3 articles this year alone, describing recent incidents where tenants were left high and dry thinking the RTA protected their belongings.
The Toronto Star is no friend of tenants. I know for a fact they have no love for tenants who don't have money to buy newspapers or don't have time to click on their high paid advertisements selling Muskoka real estate and trips to Club Med. The Star is in bed with the insurance companies. That's the only reason they are printing articles trying to convince tenants to foolishly waste their money on something they don't need.

User avatar
Marc
Posts: 1707
Joined: May 31st, 2010, 9:20 pm

Re: OLA in the News: Do Renters Need Insurance?

#28 Unread post by Marc » August 18th, 2011, 9:10 pm

Since I have been here there have been numerous tenant (activists) criticizing us for giving well informed advice. Before attacking, how about trying to give some evidence and facts?

Skitter

Re: OLA in the News: Do Renters Need Insurance?

#29 Unread post by Skitter » August 18th, 2011, 9:20 pm

Reality is tenants don't need contents insurance to be compensated in case of fires and other events. Under the Residential Tenancies Act, if the fire isn't the renter's fault, the landlord will be responsible for providing compensation for lost contents.


this is a myth that was stated by a prominent tenant activist.

If the fire is NOT the landlord`s fault, the landlord`s insurance is NOT going to cover the tenant`s belongings.

But the bigger issue is NOT the tenant`s contents as many tenants claim their contents are not valuable anyway.

The GREATER issue is the tenant`s liablilty. This has been clearly explained many times by landlords and NOW also by the Star.

Tenants do cause fires, floods, their dogs DO bite people, tenants do cause unsafe conditions (ie hoarding, just ask the residents of 200 wellesley).

LIABILITY is the key reason tenants need insurance................àctivsts`keep omitting that key point.

I suspect that soon the landlord`s insurance company will be demanding PROOF of the tenants up to date insurance!

You cant rent a $1000 car without insurance, why can tenants rent a $100,000 plus apt without insurance??

Openborders
Posts: 31
Joined: August 18th, 2011, 12:58 pm

Re: OLA in the News: Do Renters Need Insurance?

#30 Unread post by Openborders » August 18th, 2011, 9:41 pm

If you think I'm going to be intimidated by a gang up here, you are mistaken.

Post Reply

Who is online

In total there are 115 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 115 guests (based on users active over the past 600 minutes)
Most users ever online was 2118 on November 12th, 2019, 10:35 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 115 guests