Never had a problem with them. Both times when the tenants moved out again we handed the money back to SC. It is the tenants that paid more overall, as there is an added interest to pay to Swiss Caution for the service.
When the tenant moves out, if there are any claims against them for damages, the tenant must agree before Swiss Caution will pay the landlord. The payment is limited to the amount of the deposit.
The tenant must then reimburse Swiss Caution for the amount paid out on their behalf. If the tenant has insurance coverage, they have to deal with this directly.
In my experience, some landlords have been reluctant to accept Swiss Caution because unlike the traditional rental surety account, they do not see the deposit money sitting in a bank account. Some landlords also feel that a tenant is more likely to want to settle up after the handover knowing they will see most or all of their deposit back once they sign the bank release forms.
I have been asked by landlords what happens if a tenant fails to pay the annual premium after the initial guarantee certificate is issued. I imagine this can get rather complicated.
Here I am again.
Sorry for the lateness in my reply. Lappy only runs in the morning and I don't have a phone with internet connection.
I made a mistake I should've put "money" this way in my initial post. Apologies for the mix up.
We got a certificate that Swiss Caution will guarantee the asked deposit (here it is just one months rent we usually asked for) and also, if we would've had claims (damages, repainting etc) after the tenants moved out, they guaranteed to cover costs up to the mentioned amount on the certificate.
They would've paid us, and charged the money then to the insured person, so we wouldn't have had to deal with such stuff either.
It was actually hassle free this way, we didn't have to open, and subsequently close again, an account with a bank (as it is usually done).
SwissCaution is an insurance basically and is FINMA controlled and thus' it is the same as if you would've got a) the guarantee in writing from a regular bank or b) the money in cash, as you won't profit from it anyway, as you have to deposit it in a locked (?) account.
We were sceptical at first too (this was 10-12 yrs ago) but a friend of the ex hubby who owned a medium sized rental agency, recommended it. And he was right to do so
HTH
EE
Actually found out that Swisscaution is quite expensive compared to other rental deposit insurances. http://www.moneyland.ch/en/rental-guarantee-comparison
The landlord can claim from Swisscaution only if the tenant agrees or the claim is enforceable: Art 5.1 https://static.swisscaution.ch/docs/..._PDF_BH_EN.pdf
However Swisscaution will add 100.- administrative cost on the reimbursement for the tenant.
I can't help you out here. None of my clients who used Swiss Caution to guarantee their deposits had any damages when they moved out.
same here
Would I recommend Swiss Caution? I think when someone is moving locally and may have one deposit locked in a bank at least until the handover, then SwissCaution is very helpful.
I had one client where the landlord was opposed to Swiss Caution but the tenant really did not have available funds for the deposit. So we agreed that the tenant used deposit insurance until the end of December, then a rental surety account was opened at a bank.
The tenant was planning on staying long term. When you add up the cost of the deposit insurance over 5 years, for example, depending on the deposit amount it can get quite expensive.
When these tenants moved they got all of their deposit back.
If I were to rent out my own property, I would prefer the deposit in a bank account. My reason is that I prefer to deal directly with a tenant at the final inspection, and if there is damage, an insurance company might get involved. As the tenant must agree in all cases, I see no advantage in SwissCaution. In fact, for the tenant, they may have to come up with money to reimburse SwissCaution, whereas with the deposit in the bank the money is readily available.
Then, if there are damages, and the money is not readily available, the tenant ends up with a debt (at an uncomfortable interest rate) to SwissCaution.
Moreover, I have repeatedly heard the misconception that if there were to be any damages, then jolly old SwissCaution will just cover them. A tenant who has believed this misinformation, and then later finds him/herself in debt to SwissCaution, could potentially try to cause other problems for a landlord.
A tenant whose deposit is, on the other hand, safe and sound in a blocked bank account, is likely to try to give the rented object back in good condition, so as to regain access to that deposit.
I like your solution, though, Mrs. Doolittle, of using SwissCaution only as a temporary measure for a defined period, especially when everyone is sure that the cash for a deposit into the bank will soon be available, such as from real salary payments.
Accepting Swisscaution might bear the risk that they stop covering damages if the tenant stops paying their fees.