If you own a townhouse or apartment within a community titles scheme, the building insurance is usually held by the body corporate. That policy generally covers the structure itself, along with shared services and common property; things like roofs, external walls, shared plumbing, and electrical infrastructure. On paper, it sounds fairly straightforward. In practice, once an actual insurance event occurs, storm damage, water ingress, fire, flooding, things can become messy very quickly due to the number of interested parties pushing for a resolve. The landlord, tenant, property manager, strata manager, committee, insurer, loss adjuster, and contractors all end up sitting inside the same process, often with very different priorities and very little direct control.
And while the insurance claim slowly works its way through the system, the tenancy itself still needs to continues in real time.
The Insurance Process Rarely Moves Quickly
A fairly common example might involve a burst pipe inside a ceiling cavity which damages a bathroom and makes part of the property unusable. In many cases, the pipe itself and the resulting structural repairs fall under the body corporate’s building insurance policy. Naturally, landlords assume the issue will now simply move through the insurer and be resolved.
But the claim usually cannot be lodged directly by the owner or property manager. Instead, it generally moves through the strata manager or committee first. From there, the insurer may require inspections, reports, quotes, scopes of work, approvals, and contractor engagement before repairs even begin. That process can take weeks. Sometimes months.
In the meantime, tenants still want timelines, owners still want answers, and the property manager is often stuck sitting between all parties with very little meaningful information to provide. One of the more frustrating aspects of strata insurance claims is that the people managing the tenancy usually have the least visibility over the process itself.
The Landlord’s Obligations Continue Regardless
This is the part many owners understandably struggle with initially. The landlord’s obligations under the tenancy agreement do not pause simply because the insurance claim is outside their control.
Under Queensland tenancy legislation, the property still needs to remain fit for the tenant to live in. If an essential part of the property becomes unusable for an extended period, whether that’s the only bathroom, kitchen, laundry, or bedroom, the issue becomes a tenancy problem long before it becomes an insurance outcome.
That can mean:
- rent reductions
- compensation discussions
- temporary accommodation
- partial loss of amenity claims
- or in more serious situations, termination of the tenancy altogether
Importantly, the tenant’s frustration is often directed toward the property manager and landlord first, not the insurer or body corporate.
From the tenant’s perspective, they’re still paying rent while part of the property no longer functions properly. The fact the insurer is waiting on committee approvals or engineering reports doesn’t really change that experience.
Sometimes Waiting Costs More Than Acting
One of the more difficult commercial decisions during these situations is determining whether it’s worth waiting for the insurer at all, because sometimes it simply isn’t.
If carpets are soaked, paintwork is deteriorating further, mould is beginning to develop, or a tenant is close to vacating due to ongoing disruption, waiting another six weeks for an approval process may end up costing substantially more than simply resolving the issue immediately. This is where experienced property management becomes less about strict process and more about practical commercial judgement.
There are plenty of situations where landlords are better off:
- arranging repairs immediately
- funding temporary works themselves
- offering short-term rent abatements
- or assisting with temporary accommodation first
and then attempting to recover costs through insurance later. Not because it’s technically fair, but because preserving the tenancy, limiting further damage, and reducing escalation often becomes the cheaper outcome overall.
A broken tenancy sitting inside an already damaged property can become far more expensive than the repair itself fairly quickly.
Communication Usually Becomes the Biggest Problem
Operationally, the communication breakdown is often worse than the damage itself. The property manager is not the claimant and they are usually not speaking directly with the insurer. They are usually relying on updates from the strata manager, who may themselves be waiting on the committee, engineers, contractors, or assessors before they can provide any meaningful response.
Meanwhile everyone else still (understandably) expects certainty.
Owners want answers around liability, timelines, excesses, and rent loss. Tenants want to know when their home will return to normal. The property manager is left trying to manage expectations around a process they don’t actually control.
This is where these situations often become emotionally charged far earlier than people expect. Not necessarily because the issue itself is catastrophic, but because prolonged uncertainty wears everybody down over time.
This Is Where Experienced Property Management Matters
These situations also expose a fairly uncomfortable reality within the industry: many property managers simply don’t understand strata insurance particularly well. Community title insurance claims sit at the intersection of tenancy law, body corporate legislation, building maintenance, insurance processes, and practical risk management. It’s a complicated area, and if someone hasn’t dealt with these situations repeatedly before, they can very quickly end up out of their depth.
Unfortunately, that often leads to one of two outcomes:
- the issue gets ignored while everybody waits for somebody else to act
- or landlords receive advice that is technically incorrect, incomplete, or commercially unrealistic
One of the most common examples is confusion around what actually falls under the strata policy versus the landlord’s own insurance. Structural components and original building infrastructure may fall under the body corporate cover, but things like carpets, floating floors, many fittings, blinds, air conditioning units, and internal fixtures frequently do not. Waiting three months for a strata insurer to assess something that should have been lodged under the landlord’s own policy from day one can create enormous unnecessary delays.
The other major issue is passivity. Strata managers and committees are often managing large volumes of lots, tradies, approvals, meetings, and competing priorities simultaneously. Things rarely move quickly on their own. If nobody is actively pushing the process forward, following up quotes, escalating delays, coordinating trades, involving owners in decisions, and maintaining pressure on timelines, matters can drift for weeks with very little progress.
Good property managers understand this. Their role becomes part coordination, part escalation, and part damage control. In practice, waiting quietly for the system to resolve itself is usually how relatively minor insurance issues slowly become major tenancy problems.
What Landlords Should Understand About Coverage
One of the more common misconceptions around strata insurance is the assumption that the building policy covers everything inside the lot.
Often it doesn’t.
Items like carpets, blinds, air conditioning units, floating floors, upgraded fixtures, internal cabinetry, and landlord contents may fall outside the body corporate’s policy entirely depending on the scheme and the policy wording itself. That’s why comprehensive landlord insurance remains essential, even within a strata complex.
At minimum, landlords should understand:
- what the body corporate policy actually covers
- where their own landlord insurance begins
- whether loss of rent is included
- whether temporary accommodation is covered
- and how excesses are handled between parties
By the time a major claim occurs is usually the worst possible moment to discover assumptions were incorrect.
The Best Outcomes Usually Come From Acting Early
More broadly though, situations like this reinforce a fairly consistent reality within property management:
Sometimes it’s cheaper to solve the problem quickly than to wait for perfect procedural clarity.
If spending money today prevents a tenancy breakdown, limits further property damage, avoids a compensation dispute, or stops a matter ending up at QCAT six months later, the short-term cost is often commercially justified. Particularly when multiple insurers, committees, and contractors are involved.