56 questions, 56 straight answers.

It does not replace lost profit, as many hope. In practice, it typically covers the fixed costs of the downtime period — for example, the utility costs tied to the building — and, depending on the policy, a limited, time-capped wage burden for retained employees. It's a rarely requested add-on; if it comes up, we work out honestly what it would provide and at what cost.

It protects the company's own assets at the premises: the building, the machinery and equipment, and the stock — primarily against the classic perils (fire, storm, water damage from pipes, burglary). Damage caused to others already falls under liability insurance.

Yes: the building's insurance protects the owner's assets — the company's equipment, stock and tenant improvements are not covered by it. The tenant needs to arrange cover for its own asset groups, and it's worth aligning the boundary with the lease agreement.

Typically it's a separate module: the basic fire and natural-hazard cover is supplemented by machinery breakdown or electronic equipment insurance. How much it's worth depends on your machinery fleet.

Typically excluded are damage arising from neglected maintenance and gradual damage (corrosion, groundwater); in the case of intentional or grossly negligent damage, the insurer is typically relieved of its obligation to pay — and damage caused to others, construction work, vehicles and goods in transit belong to separate products. It's worth learning the exclusions before taking out cover, and I help with that.

By default, no: cover is tied to the premises. The solution is off-site cover, which protects assets taken off-site up to a limit and within a defined territorial scope — it's not worth relying on employees' home insurance.

In the first instance, typically your own property insurance responds, since it's the company's own assets that were damaged, regardless of who caused it. If the damage is demonstrably due to the subcontractor's negligence, after paying out the insurer may typically pursue a recovery claim against the subcontractor or their liability insurer – so it's worth checking your contracting partners' liability cover in advance too.

The theft cover of commercial property insurance is for burglary: Hungarian policy conditions typically require that the offender entered the locked premises by force – by breaking open a door or window, or by breaking through a wall or roof – or, provably, with a false key, and that this left traces; goods taken off the shelf during opening hours, an item ‘forgotten’ at the self-checkout, or a shortage of unknown origin that comes to light at stocktaking are therefore not an insured event. One Hungarian insurer's all-risks property insurance conditions, for example, expressly exclude theft (other than burglary), inventory shortages, pilferage and any other disappearance of unexplained origin – the wording varies by insurer, but the logic is the same: the insurer can only accept a loss whose time, manner and extent can be proven, and an inventory shortage shows at most the extent, not the time, the manner or the cause. The losses, meanwhile, are not small: according to an Economx article published in October 2025 and based on data from the ORFK (Hungary's National Police Headquarters), the number of shoplifting cases involving more than HUF 50,000 has risen by 78 per cent nationwide since the reopening after the pandemic restrictions in 2021, and the number of low-value cases by more than 120 per cent. What can be done: shoplifting is primarily a matter of security and organisation – cameras, anti-theft gates and tags, discipline at the tills and in stocktaking, and, in an unstaffed smart shop, entry control and supervision – while against the offender, what remains is reporting the crime to the police and claiming compensation for the loss under civil law. Separate ‘shoplifting’ or ‘theft during opening hours’ cover can be taken out only under some policy conditions, as an add-on, with a limit and a deductible – it varies by insurer, and even this does not cover inventory shortages – so it is worth checking the burglary definition and the list of exclusions in your own policy; if you let me know, I will check on the basis of the policy conditions whether such an add-on is available from the insurers that could be considered.

Deliberate damage that does not involve a break-in is typically not part of the basic cover of Hungarian commercial property insurance: burglary cover pays for damage connected with forced entry or an attempt at it – the door that was forced, the wall that was broken through – but a shop window smashed ‘just like that’ or lettering sprayed on a wall is neither fire, nor storm, nor burglary. Vandalism, that is, damage intentionally caused by a third party, can be taken out with several insurers as a separate add-on or clause, with a limit per loss event and per insurance period, and with a deductible; one Hungarian insurer's vandalism add-on, for example, covers the intentional destruction of or damage to insured property by a third party, but excludes damage caused by graffiti as well as the cost of removing graffiti, while another insurer's all-risks policy conditions cover vandalism but exclude cosmetic damage – graffiti, discolouration, scratches. A smashed shop window is typically a matter for glass breakage cover, which under many policy conditions – subject to the listed exclusions – pays for breakage of the glass surfaces specified in the policy regardless of the cause of the breakage, up to a limit; under most policy conditions, removing graffiti remains the owner's own cost – the details vary by insurer. What to do: report the damage to the police, because where the offender is unknown, the police report is the practical basis for tracing them and for any later claim against them, and insurers typically ask for proof of the report when settling the claim; photograph the damage before it is repaired, and report the claim on the insurer's claims line. If damage keeps recurring at your premises, it is worth checking in your policy whether you have vandalism and glass breakage cover, and with what limit; if you let me know, I will check on the basis of the policy conditions which insurer offers it and in what form.

In Hungarian commercial property insurance, snow load is typically a separately named natural peril, not part of storm cover: one Hungarian insurer's all-risks policy conditions, for example, define snow load as breakage and deformation caused by the static and dynamic pressure of large amounts of snow accumulating on the roofs of buildings – whether this is included in the basic cover or is an optional element varies by package and by insurer, so it has to be checked in the list of covers in your policy. The collapsed hall roof and the machinery and stock destroyed beneath it may then fall under snow load cover; how damage caused to property stored outdoors by snow sliding off the roof or by a falling icicle is assessed, however, varies from one set of policy conditions to another – some conditions bring damage from a sliding mass of snow under snow load, others do not, and a parked company car is a matter not for property insurance but for casco (comprehensive motor insurance) – policy conditions typically exclude weather damage to movable property left in the open, and most conditions do not even name icicles separately. If falling snow or ice hits not the company's property but someone else's property or a passer-by, that is a matter not for property insurance but for liability insurance: according to information published by MABISZ (the Hungarian insurers' association) in January 2026, damage caused to others by snow and ice falling from house roofs is covered by the liability section of home insurance policies; for a company, the same may be covered by the liability section of the policy – typically the property owner's, tenant's or operator's extension of general (business-activity) liability insurance – if the contract includes it, which varies by insurer. For a flat-roofed hall, the snow load is part of loss prevention: policy conditions require the insured to take the loss prevention measures that can be expected in the given situation, and if the roof caves in because of a neglected roof structure or slow deterioration, the insurer may invoke the exclusion for prolonged weather exposure, and in the case of gross negligence it may be released from paying – although the burden of proving the latter is on the insurer. In the event of a loss, the order is: if there is a danger to life, cordon off the area; protect the building against further water ingress; document the damage with photos and video; and then report the claim on the insurer's claims line. It is also worth keeping the design data on the roof's snow load capacity and evidence that the snow was cleared (a log, invoices).

Sewage backing up from the sewer falls between two covers of commercial property insurance: in Hungarian policy conditions, escape of water (vezetékes vízkár) typically means damage from liquid escaping suddenly and abnormally from the building's own water, heating and waste-water pipes due to a fracture, crack or blockage, while flood, inland-water (belvíz) and cloudburst cover applies to water arriving from outside, over the surface – water forced back through the public sewer fits neither definition exactly, so some basic policy conditions exclude it or cover it only through a clause, while others expressly name it within the escape-of-water cover. Under cloudburst cover, several policy conditions expressly exclude the flooding of rooms below ground level or on the lower ground floor, or pay only for stock stored at a certain height above the floor, and they typically exclude damage caused by inland water and groundwater – it varies from insurer to insurer, so it is worth checking the ‘cloudburst’, ‘escape of water’ and ‘exclusions’ sections of your own policy conditions. The gap can be narrowed with a clause: some Hungarian policy conditions offer water-ingress or extra water-damage cover, which also pays for flooding caused by seal failure and blockage and for damage from blocked drainpipes, and some products already expressly name damage from water flowing back from the sewage pipe for any reason in the basic water-damage cover – here too the limit and the inland-water exclusion vary from insurer to insurer. For a lower-ground-floor shop or a basement storeroom the stakes are high: during a cloudburst, the public sewer can push sewage back up through the floor drain and the toilet, and beyond the stock, the damage can also involve disinfection and demolition work. Loss prevention is tangible here: fitting a non-return valve or backflow preventer in the sewer connection, raising stock onto pallets or shelves and maintaining the floor drains reduce the risk, and several policy conditions may also make payment conditional on such requirements. In the event of a claim, it is worth documenting the route the water took (whether it came from the sewer, your own pipe or the surface) with photos and a certificate from the sewer operator, because the insurer decides on this basis which cover the case falls under – the claim is reported via the insurer's claims line.

Pro-rata settlement: if the sums insured are set at only 60% of the real value, the insurer may also pay only 60% of the claim. I help with reviewing the sums insured, on request.

At reinstatement cost — not market price and not book value. The market price also prices in the land, and the book value follows depreciation: both are misleading. Reinstatement cost can be estimated well on a per-square-metre basis.

There are established solutions for this: declaring an average stock level, a maximum limit, or a periodic increase — the exact form varies by insurer. The point is that the seasonal peak shouldn't go uncovered, and you shouldn't overpay for the quiet period either.

The risk class of the activity, the construction type, the sums insured, the chosen scope of cover and deductible, the security measures, and the claims history. A specific premium can only be responsibly quoted from an actual offer — that's why we run a competitive comparison, and it's worth looking at the premium together with what it covers.

One that the company can comfortably absorb, even if it happens several times a year. A higher deductible brings a premium advantage but can hurt when a real claim happens; a deductible pushed down to zero is expensive. This is a conscious decision tailored to the company.

It's the annual value adjustment: the insurer aligns the sums insured with price changes. It's typically worth accepting — if you reject it for years, your policy quietly becomes underinsured. Large, one-off changes, however, need to be reported separately.

Over-insurance is wasteful too: at a claim, the insurer pays out the actual, proven loss, so the amount above the real value brings no extra payout — it just pushes up the premium unnecessarily. So the goal isn't the highest possible sum insured, but keeping the value accurate and reviewed every year, in both directions.

There's no general legal requirement to do so, but above a certain value threshold or risk level, the insurer may set an expected security standard as a policy condition (e.g. a certified alarm, camera, security grilles) — this varies by insurer and by premises. An unmet security requirement can be grounds for rejection or a pro-rata settlement at claim time, so it's worth clarifying this precisely before taking out cover.

The address and characteristics of the premises, the sums insured by asset group (building, machinery, stock), the business activity and revenue range, and claims history. I provide a template — you only need to gather it once.

From the survey to the comparison table, it typically takes a few days, and taking out the policy afterwards is quick administration. The exact timeline depends on how complex the risk is and how fast the insurers respond — if your situation is urgent, flag this in advance.

From the inception of cover set out in the policy — not automatically from the date of signing. For some covers (flood, for example) a waiting period may also apply. When switching, we align the old and the new policy without any gap.

Property insurance policies can typically be cancelled at the annual renewal date, with the notice period set out in the policy — so it's worth starting the comparison weeks before the renewal date. Mid-year, an amendment (increasing the sum insured, adding a new cover element) typically goes through without trouble.

Because the typical problems come not from the policy being missing, but from it going stale: outdated sums insured, unreported changes, missing items. The review is free of charge and can have three outcomes: everything is fine, an adjustment is needed, or switching is justified — I'll say honestly which one applies.

A 20-minute conversation, with a site visit if needed: building, machinery, stock, security measures, existing policy. At the end, a precise risk picture emerges, on which sensible offers can be requested. Free of charge and with no obligation.

The policyholder pays the premium and handles the administration, while the insured is whoever's assets the policy protects — in a group of companies these two roles can differ, and the assets of several subsidiaries can appear on one policy, broken down by premises. It's worth clarifying the exact structure already when requesting an offer, so there's no dispute over entitlement at claim time.

These are two separate cases. If you sell the site or the assets (not the company), the insurable interest ceases, and under the cessation-of-interest rule of the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.) the contract, or the corresponding part of it, terminates: the buyer does not inherit the cover and has to take out its own contract, while the seller's insurer settles the account with the premium due up to the end of the risk-bearing period. If the company is sold as a legal entity (transfer of business shares), the policyholder and the insured do not change and the contract continues; under the policy conditions, the change of ownership and the significant changes that come with it (new activity, new address, new management) typically have to be reported in writing within a few days – the deadline varies by insurer. In the case of a transformation, merger, demerger or conversion into a Kft. (limited liability company), under the rules on legal persons the legal successor takes the place of the legal predecessor, so the contract passes to the successor – in a demerger, to the successor named in the demerger plan – but the insurer must be notified and the policy transferred to the successor's name. If the property sold was already in the buyer's possession before (for example, after a lease or rental), under the main rule of the Ptk. the cover passes together with ownership, the old and the new owner are jointly and severally liable for the premium due at the time of transfer, and either party may terminate the contract in writing, with thirty days' notice, within thirty days of becoming aware of the change of ownership – in commercial contracts, however, the policy conditions may deviate from this, and there is a Hungarian set of conditions that applies the cessation-of-interest rule in this case too. In practice, it is worth timing the start of the buyer's own contract for the day of the sale and terminating your own contract in writing for the part sold, so that there is neither a gap in cover nor a double premium payment.

Yes, but not at any time and not in any manner: the insurer – just like the company – may terminate an open-ended commercial property insurance contract as of the end of the insurance period, in writing, with thirty days' notice under the insurance chapter of the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.); Hungarian policy conditions typically adopt this, but commercial contracts may also deviate from it. In addition, some conditions may give the insurer a right to terminate during the year after a claim has been reported or paid – this is not common in Hungarian commercial property insurance conditions, and where it exists, the time limit varies from one set of conditions to another – so you need to check the termination clause of your own conditions. More common than termination is that the insurer raises the premium for the next insurance period, introduces a higher deductible or an exclusion, or – if the loss points to a significant increase in risk – within 15 days of becoming aware of it proposes an amendment or terminates the contract with 30 days' notice; the company is not obliged to accept the amendment, but in that case the contract may terminate. After termination, the company can take out a new contract, but because of the duty of disclosure it must state the loss accurately when requesting new quotes, since if the claims history is concealed – and the concealed circumstance contributed to a later loss – the new insurer's obligation to pay does not arise. After receiving the notice of termination, it is worth using the remaining time to request quotes: ask the insurer for a claims history certificate (claims list), and present the measures taken after the loss – improved protection, maintenance, new procedures – because these affect the new insurer's willingness to accept the risk and its terms; if you let me know, I prepare the comparison and the paperwork.

Typically a single combined policy is clearer: one renewal date, one set of terms, with precise sums insured per premises. The rule doesn't change: every address is a place of risk, and any new premises must be reported.

The right order is: first get the new address into the policy, then start the move. Assets in transit need a separate solution, and cover at the old address should stay in place for as long as there are still assets there.

Yes, in two ways: the works may amount to a change in risk that must be reported under the existing policy, while the construction itself needs a separate product, construction and erection insurance. After handover, the new part of the building must also be added to the property insurance.

On-premises cover doesn't extend to this by default. Off-premises cover or a temporary solution tailored to the event provides protection — considered together with transport and overnight storage.

Cash is a separately named cover, typically with limits tied to the method of storage (cash box, steel cabinet, certified safe). The exact levels are set out in the policy wording — it's worth aligning your daily routine (till clearing, bank deposits) to match.

No: road-going vehicles belong to the world of compulsory (MTPL) and casco insurance — that's what flotta.biz covers. Site work machinery (e.g. a forklift), however, can typically be brought under the property and machinery breakdown cover.

Typically the user – i.e. the company – needs to arrange the property insurance, while the financing party may ask for assignment or a clause on the policy so that its own interest is protected too in the event of a claim. It's worth aligning the insurance requirement set out in the lease or loan agreement with the property insurance survey, so nothing is left out.

Typically not: the risk of goods in transit is a separate product, the territory of goods-in-transit/cargo insurance — on-site property insurance protects the stock inside the warehouse. If you regularly transport goods with your own vehicle or via a subcontractor, it's worth clarifying this boundary in advance, matched to how you ship.

Casco (comprehensive motor insurance) insures the vehicle and its built-in accessories listed in the policy; Hungarian casco policy conditions typically do not extend to the cargo, tools, laptop or instruments carried in it, except up to a smaller, separately named luggage or personal-belongings limit, which typically also excludes work equipment, tools and goods carried for a fee – this varies from insurer to insurer. Property insurance for business premises, on the other hand, covers assets stored at the risk location stated in the policy, typically ties burglary to forced entry into insured, locked premises, and typically expressly excludes motor vehicles that require a registration certificate from the insured assets – so equipment left in a parked car falls into the uncovered gap between the two contracts. This gap can be closed with a separate clause: cover for off-premises or portable work equipment, which several policy conditions offer with nationwide territorial scope, or an add-on specifically for assets stored or carried in a motor vehicle. These clauses typically come with conditions: the vehicle must be locked, the equipment must be kept where it cannot be seen from outside (in the boot or a closed box), traces of the break-in must be provable, restrictions or exclusions for night-time hours are common, and the limit is much lower than the sum for the premises – the details vary from insurer to insurer. For a company working with service vehicles, instrument vans or demonstration equipment, it is worth checking in the policy whether there is such a clause and with what limit; in the event of a claim, the police report and a list of the equipment stored in the vehicle (inventory, invoices) form the basis of the claim notification on the insurer's claims line.

Commercial property insurance conditions typically build their cover around assets kept in a building or a room: for storm, cloudburst and precipitation damage, several policy conditions exclude movable stock, machinery and containers stored in the open, under temporary covering or in an open-sided shed, while burglary by definition requires forced entry into a closed room, so goods that go missing from inside the fence but from the open air are not covered by that either – it varies from insurer to insurer. That is why, when a claim arises – soaked or swept-away timber, scattered pallets, an overturned outdoor machine – the reason for rejection is often not the nature of the damage but the fact that the place where the asset was stored was not insured. The solution is a clause written specifically for this: some Hungarian policy conditions offer it under the name ‘cover for assets stored in the open’, which extends the basic cover to assets placed outdoors at the risk location, typically under separate conditions – one clause on the market, for example, pays for storm and cloudburst damage only for items placed on stands at least 12 cm high, and also excludes tarpaulin or plastic-sheet accessories, unfixed advertising boards, as well as burglary and shortages from this cover. Theft risk needs separate consideration: theft of stock stored in the open is typically insurable only if the policy conditions expressly name it, and even then a fence, a locked gate, guarding or camera surveillance is required, with a separate limit – this too varies from insurer to insurer. For a timber yard, a building-materials merchant or a machinery-hire firm, it is therefore worth checking in the policy whether it includes a clause for assets stored in the open, for what amount and with what storage conditions, and keeping outdoor stock on a separate line in the inventory so that it can be proven in the event of a claim.

For a routine matter, the insurer's channel is the fastest — I help with getting it started. When a claim gets stuck or disputed, I step in as broker to help the company, where I can.

First, safety and loss mitigation (main shut-off valve, disconnecting power, tarpaulin cover), then photos and video of everything before anything is moved, then notification via the insurer's claims line or online portal. The site of the loss should, if possible, be left unchanged until the loss adjustment.

Call the police and file a report, leave the scene undisturbed until it has been examined, save the camera and alarm footage — and in parallel, report the claim via the insurer's line. For the list of missing items, an up-to-date inventory is worth the most.

The most common reasons: underinsurance (pro-rata reduction), damage falling under an exclusion, an unmet security requirement, a late or incomplete notification, or a maintenance failure. Every one of these is preventable — that's the point of preparation.

Ask for a written, itemised justification, compare it against the policy wording — and bring me in: in a disputed matter, I help where I can, based on the wording and the documents – if needed, with the steps of the complaints procedure too.

Typically, proof of ownership and value (invoices, inventory), evidence of the loss event (photos, official records), and technical documents (inspection reports). It's worth answering fully in one round — if a document is missing, say so honestly and offer an alternative.

Burglary typically involves forced entry into a closed space, while robbery involves violence or the threat of it against a person who is present — property insurance terms can define the two differently, and expect different evidence for each (scene traces, witness statements). In the police report and the claim notification, it's worth describing exactly what happened rather than using the everyday term.

The notification deadline is set not by the law but by the contract: Hungarian corporate property insurance conditions typically require notification within two days or two working days of discovering the loss, and in addition, in the case of fire, notifying the fire service without delay, and in the case of burglary, a report to the police. Under Section 6:453 of the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.), a delay in itself does not lead to the claim being declined: the insurer's obligation does not arise if, because of the late notification, material circumstances can no longer be established – but the company bears this risk, so reporting on the insurer's claims line within the first few days is the sensible route. Under the general rule of the Ptk., the limitation period for the claim would be five years, but insurance conditions may also stipulate a shorter limitation period, typically one or two years, and in a corporate, non-consumer contract this can apply; a 2024 decision of the Kúria (Hungary's Supreme Court) found the one-year shortening unfair in a consumer casco (comprehensive motor insurance) contract. So check the claim notification and limitation clauses of your own conditions, and if the insurer has declined the claim, bear in mind that limitation keeps running – under the Ptk. in force, it is interrupted by enforcement in court or by acknowledgement of the debt, not by a mere written demand.

Property insurance typically does not require you to spend the indemnity on reinstatement – if a financier (a bank or leasing company) is named on the policy as assignee, the insurer pays the indemnity to the financier, or to the company with the financier's consent – but the amount of the indemnity does depend on whether the property is reinstated. Hungarian policy conditions typically make settlement at replacement-as-new value (the cost of restoring the item to new condition) conditional on the reinstatement or replacement taking place within the period set in the conditions; if it does not, the upper limit is the actual (depreciated) value, and for a building that is a total loss often the market value – one Hungarian set of commercial policy conditions, for example, allows three years for rebuilding; the deadline and the method of calculation differ from insurer to insurer. If you carry out the reinstatement yourself or without invoices, the insurer pays the reinstatement cost calculated under its conditions, as a net amount: under Section 123 of the Insurance Act (Bit.), it may undertake to reimburse VAT only on the basis of an invoice, so this matters to anyone who cannot reclaim VAT (the ‘Net or gross?’ article covers this). Deductions for depreciation and the deductible, and the proportional (average) settlement for underinsurance, apply in the same way as with an invoiced reinstatement. It is therefore worth asking the insurer in writing, after the loss inspection, how much it will pay with reinstatement and how much without, and only then deciding; the insurer pays only for what your contract describes as its benefit, and only in the way the contract describes it.

Yes: Section 77 of the Accounting Act classifies income received in connection with loss events as other income, so the insurer's payment appears as income in the company's profit – and in the corporate tax base – while the loss itself is an expense on the other side. Derecognising the damaged asset or writing down its value (for a tangible fixed asset, typically through unplanned depreciation) is recognised under other expenses and the repair invoice is a cost, whereas a new machine bought as a replacement is an investment that the company capitalises and depreciates in the usual way – so the two do not simply ‘cancel each other out’ in the books. No VAT is payable on the amount received from the insurer and no invoice has to be issued to the insurer, because compensation is not consideration; the VAT on the reinstatement invoice is handled by the company according to its own VAT status, which is why net and gross settlement differ (the ‘Net or gross?’ article covers this). When the claim is closed, it is worth asking your accountant when the payment has to be recognised (on payment, or already at the amount accepted in writing by the insurer by the time the balance sheet is prepared), how to treat the deductible and the part not reimbursed because of depreciation, and whether the claim documents – the loss assessment report, the calculation, the insurer's acceptance letter, the reinstatement invoices – have been filed with the accounting records. The details depend on the company's tax position, so it is worth clarifying the specific accounting treatment with your accountant or tax adviser.

For commercial property insurance there is no statutory number of days like the one for compulsory motor third-party liability (MTPL) insurance, where the law gives the insurer 15 days from receipt of the necessary documents – and at most three months from submission of the claim – to make a compensation offer or give a reasoned reply: the deadline for payment is set in the insurer's policy conditions, and Hungarian conditions typically count it not from the claim notification but from receipt of the last document needed to assess the claim – the conditions often state 15 days, but this differs from insurer to insurer. In practice, therefore, the time is determined by the loss inspection and by supplying missing documents: as long as the insurer's inspection has not taken place, or an invoice, the VAT declaration, or a fire investigation or police document is missing, the deadline does not even start. The process is typically notification, inspection, calculation of the loss, a settlement offer or written position, then payment; for a larger loss, an advance payment can be requested for the part no longer in dispute, if the conditions allow it. On its own side, the company can submit the documents listed in the conditions in full together with the notification, make its statements in the requested form, and preserve the state of the damage until the inspection – I cannot promise a deadline on the insurer's behalf; the insurer pays only for what is an insured event under the contract and is supported by the documents, and only then. If the insurer does not pay even after its own deadline has passed and does not ask for missing documents either, the next step is a written complaint to the insurer, and after that – since a company is not a consumer, the Financial Arbitration Board (PBT) is not open to it – the courts; default interest under the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.) can be claimed for the delay.

In property insurance, the insurance chapter of the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.) does not oblige the insurer to make an advance payment on the claim: under that chapter, when an insured event occurs, the insurer must provide the benefit specified in the contract, and policy conditions typically link the due date to a deadline counted from receipt of the last document needed for claims settlement (often 15 days) – as long as the legal basis or the amount of the claim is still open, the insurer does not pay. An advance payment on the claim therefore follows from the policy conditions and varies by insurer: one Hungarian insurer's all-risks policy conditions state that the insurer cannot be obliged to pay an advance on compensation, whereas another insurer's property insurance conditions provide that if it has been established during claims settlement that an insured event has occurred and the legal basis has been clarified, the insurer may, at the insured's request, pay an advance up to a specified proportion of the expected benefit – in both cases it is a possibility, not the company's right. In practice, with a major fire or storm loss, asking for an advance is a workable route if the insured event and the cover are not disputed and part of the loss is already supported by documents: the basis is formed by the inspection report, the undisputed items (for example invoices for debris removal and for protecting the property against further deterioration, the inventory value of the destroyed machinery) and the quotes for reinstatement, and the insurer deducts the advance from the final payment. It is advisable to submit the request for an advance in writing to the insurer's claims handler, quoting the claim number and stating the amount requested and which items are undisputed; where a deductible, underinsurance or a dispute over the legal basis is involved, the insurer typically refuses or reduces the advance. If the company's operations depend on it, business interruption insurance – if there is one – may replace the lost gross profit; the primary route for reporting the claim and for the request is the insurer's claims line, and if a case gets stuck or is disputed, I help where I can, acting on the company's behalf – but the insurer pays only for what is an insured event under the contract, and it is the insurer's policy conditions that also decide on the advance.

It's free for the client: I don't charge a fee for the advice, the broker's remuneration is paid by the insurer. My interest lies in a long-term, satisfied client relationship — not a one-off sale.

For the client: as a broker, I act on the client's instructions, I compare offers from several insurers, and the decision is always the client's. Operations take place under MNB registration — the number can be checked in the footer.

I don't “recommend” any single one by name — I show you the content instead. I hand over the offers in a table, with strengths and weaknesses, and sometimes the existing policy turns out to be the best choice. The decision is the client's — my job is to make sure it's made from a clear picture.

Not necessarily: the 20-minute conversation also works by phone or video call, and the documents are handled online. A site visit is worth a lot when the risk is complex — that's best decided in the first conversation.

The framework for data handling is set out in the privacy notice — available from the footer. For an offer request, I only ask for the company data needed to assess the risk.

A 20-minute, free conversation: let's look together at what's at your premises — and what's not in your policy. You can book a time in the calendar, or request a callback on the booking page.