Service Families Accommodation.Building Insurance

Hello All,
Not sure if this is in the right place,so if it needs to be moved please inform me as to where.

Some may not be aware but there has been a recent change of status of Insurance for Service Families Accommodation.
Occupants are now advised to arrange Building coverage up to £20,000.

If you occupy Service Families Accommodation you will have signed a Service Licence to Occupy document due to this you are not classed as a tenant and the MOD state the minimum requirement form the 1st August 2011 is set at £20,000.

As the JSP 464 Tri service regulations state the agreements are Licence to Occupy, this means that standard home Insurance policies do not cover potential liability

The Services Insurance and Investment panel have provided a webpage detailing insurance companies that can offer and organise policies to fit the requirements.

The webpage can be found at or the home page
Has a DIN been published to inform SFA occupants of the change?

Buildings coverage only a requirement if you own the bricks and mortar.
Why not phone the HIC and find out?

Is this for bricks and mortar cover?
This is what it says. "if you occupy sfa or SSfa you will have signed. An agreement when u moved into the property called a Service License to Occupy Service. Family Accommodation known as license to occupy. Due to this you are not classed as a tenant. Within the license there is a clause that states that you are liable for damage up to at least the sum advised by the MOD which from 1 Aug 11 is set at 20,000pounds. Standard home insurance policies do not cover your liability"

So we need to get cover for bricks and mortar.

Check the following link for further details


Book Reviewer
How many Insurance companies will provide £20,000 bricks and mortar cover for a home you

a) Do not own
b) Have no valuation for
c) have no condition report for?

Any that do will ramp up the costs as well.
AFF aren't aware of the need for buildings insurance, the licence agreement recommends contents and liability insurance.
I was not aware of any requirement to insure bricks and mortar either. and the link supplied by the OP does not actually say bricks and mortar (aka buildings cover) but the wording on that page is either genuinely confusing or there really is a requirement to cover the first 20K of damage to the "landlord's" property. Unless someone beats me to it (which you are very welcome to do!), I will take a look later at the JSP (464?) and the licence to occupy.
OK, I have had a quick look at it. The Service Licence to Occupy granted by DE OPS HOUSING states that:

7.1 To cover Your legal liabilities, You are strongly advised to arrange insurance for:
7.1.1 Your liability to Us up to at least the sum advised currently by the MOD.
7.1.2 Your personal property and that of any spouse/civil partner or child; and
7.1.3 Your liability to third parties in respect of injury to them and damage to their property.
7.2 Although We strongly advise You to obtain insurance to cover Your liability to Us for the sum advised currently by the MOD. We may bring claims against You whether or not you are covered by insurance.

The insurance required does not include bricks-and-mortar buildings cover in the usual sense, but could include claims against the service occupier for damage caused to the building as a result of the occupier's actions or neglect.

About the list of insurers approved for issuing this type of specialist cover, and about the required insurance having been increased to 20K, one would expect some kind of official notification rather than it being left to a commercial website. There should be a recent DIN or something - Can anyone quote the reference?

I expect that this is taken into account, at least notionally, in the SFA charges recommended annually by the AFPRB.
Many thanks hackle,i'm finding this rather confusing due to we dont ownt the property that we live in just like many thousands of HM forces.I will look forward to your answer if you can manage to find one out :)
Surely a licence to occupy is akin to the legal agreement you would sign at a letting agency upon occupying a civilian rental property.

A civilian landlord's responsibilities are set in law, that landlord cant suddenly absolve themselves of that responsibility.

It surely goes that DE (or whoever controls housing now) are also bound by regulations. Regulations they cannot absolve themselves of.

I go for contents insurance and always inform I'm in service accommodation, there's never been a problem.
I've got contents & liability cover with Direct Line, never had any bother in 20yrs!


It woud be very very hard for the owner of the property (Annington) to force a licencee to pay up for anything. They would have to get MoD to pay them first then MoD could try and sue licencee. But given that licencee has almost no right to repairs on time, right to redecoration, is told what state the property is in and has no say in the grading etc it would be a hard ask for the MoD to enforce payment I suspect, except in cases of malicious damge to the property. Furthermore, the parlous state of some of the houses mean that they are probably non- compliant with some of the legislation that applies to us landlords and that is why we are licencees (with no legal protection from eviction etc)

Apart from which, if payment is needed and licencee does not pay it would have to be recovered through salary (and thus require CO or similar to determine if the payment was appropriate) or through the courts. I have not met anyone who has anything other than contents insurance for a quarter.

SIIAP's blurb:

SIIAP members provide specialist insurance and financial advice to members of HM Forces

By purchasing an insurance or financial product from a SIIAP member, customers have the peace of mind that they are dealing with a competent organisation who has made all the necessary arrangements to look after their interests - whether they are based in the UK or anywhere else in the world.

Seems SIIAP have a vested interest in selling it to us! Like all insurance, a good idea if you believe risk outweighs cost.....


Similar threads