The insurance advisory recommends expanding the cover for the rental building. You want to accept the offer and include the new premium later in the operating costs. For that purpose, the question of whether the contract provides sensible cover alone is not sufficient. The legal basis for passing on the costs must also be clarified.
Separate the decision on cover from the rent accounting
An insurance may be desirable from the owners' perspective without every premium automatically being chargeable as operating costs. Therefore start with two questions: which risks are to be insured? And on what basis should which costs be borne by the tenants?
The following approach concerns the statutory operating costs rule of the MRG. Whether it is applicable to your tenancy will be examined according to the specific context; § 1 MRG contains exceptions and partial application. [RAHMEN] A WEG levy or a contract clause from another building does not replace this classification.
Do not compress the types of insurance into a single package label
§ 21 paragraph 1 names different cases for insurances. Item 4 concerns the adequate fire insurance, item 5 statutory building owners' liability and water damage from pipes. Item 6 deals with adequate insurance against other damages, for example certain glass breakage or storm damage, subject to an additional consent requirement. [VERSICHERUNG]
Please therefore ask the offering party for a comprehensible breakdown of the package. Which components are new, which already exist, what does the change cost and to which conditions does it relate? A single total premium called all-round cover does not explain which statutory position needs to be examined.
Check the consent status for the specific contract
For the insurances described in item 6 the provision requires the consent of the majority of the main tenants to the conclusion, renewal or amendment; counting is by the number of rented rental units. [VERSICHERUNG] A majority resolution of the owners or a larger sum of consenting square metres is therefore not simply the same prerequisite.
Have existing declarations of consent assessed specifically: to which offer, which period and which change do they refer? An old file note “insurance discussed” should not be treated as consent to the package changed today without review. Nor should a missing reply in your internal spreadsheet be entered unilaterally as yes.
Hypothetical case: new package, old signatures
Eva finds declarations of consent to a previous storm insurance. Now a package with a changed scope of cover is being offered. She does not copy the old consent figure unexamined into the new procedure, but submits the old and new version for professional review.
For the economic decision she simultaneously records which costs she would have to bear herself if pass-onability is unresolved. This means her order does not depend on a merely hoped-for later billing. The appropriate advisory service decides on the concrete insurance cover; the legal review decides on the rent cost item.
Produce an understandable basis for decision
Our editorial recommendation: summarise the scope of cover, additional costs, contract version and legally reviewed consent requirement on one page. Those involved should be able to see what they are actually deciding on. Do not mix a personal preference for cover with the statement that onward charging is already secure.
Before billing, the actual contract conclusion, premium receipt and the evidence required for the cost item are brought together. The specialist review must also consider the appropriateness and concrete allocation; a majority alone does not make any arbitrary expense an operating cost item. [VERSICHERUNG]
Your result is a documented decision status on this exact insurance contract. That way it remains comprehensible which cover was purchased and on what basis a particular portion appears in the rent statement.