Yes, you can buy home and contents insurance separately. Despite how often they’re sold together, there’s no rule saying they must live under the same policy. The decision is mostly about fit rather than permission.
For some households, splitting them is sensible. For others, it adds friction without much gain.
Why buildings and contents are bundled in the first place
Buildings and contents insurance protect different things, but they often respond to the same events. Fire, flooding, escape of water. Packaging them together makes administration easier for insurers and customers alike.
Combined policies are also simpler to price, which is why they’re so common.
Situations where separate policies make sense
Splitting buildings and contents tends to work best when the risks don’t align neatly.
A property might be unusual to insure, while the contents are ordinary. Or the building may be standard, but the contents include higher-value items that need specialist treatment.
- Older or non-standard buildings with specialist insurers
- High-value contents needing higher limits
- Leasehold flats with buildings insurance already arranged
In these cases, separating policies allows each risk to sit where it’s most comfortable.
The advantages of buying them separately
Flexibility is the main benefit. You’re not forced to accept one insurer’s appetite for both risks.
- Access to specialist insurers for buildings or contents
- More control over limits and excesses for each section
- Ability to change one policy without affecting the other
That flexibility can be valuable where circumstances change unevenly.
The drawbacks that often get overlooked
Separate policies mean separate renewals, documents, and payments. That sounds minor until it isn’t.
There’s also the risk of overlap or gaps if the policies aren’t aligned properly. Accidental damage, legal expenses, and certain exclusions can sit awkwardly between two insurers.
- Two renewal dates to track
- Potential duplication of add-ons
- Uncertainty over which policy responds to shared events
Claims involving both building and contents can also become more complicated.
Claims when policies are split
If a single incident damages both the structure and belongings, separate insurers may handle their parts independently. That can mean duplicate excesses and parallel claims processes.
Neither approach is wrong. It’s just less streamlined.
With a combined policy, these situations are usually handled under one claim. With split policies, coordination matters more.
Cost differences in practice
Splitting policies does not automatically save money. In fact, combined policies are often priced slightly more keenly.
Separate policies can cost more overall, but they may offer better value where one part of the risk would otherwise be compromised.
Cost alone rarely settles the decision.
Mortgage and ownership considerations
If there’s a mortgage, buildings insurance must meet the lender’s requirements regardless of how contents are insured.
Lenders don’t usually mind whether contents are insured at all, let alone how. That freedom allows separation without breaching mortgage terms.
Renewals and long-term accuracy
Split policies force more active management. Values need reviewing separately. Changes must be reflected twice.
That extra effort can improve accuracy for some households. For others, it simply increases the chance something is missed.
Buying home and contents insurance separately works best when there’s a clear reason for doing so, and when the extra administration is a conscious trade-off rather than an accident.