WHO PAYS THE DAMAGE?

In 2017, a condo unit in BGC caught fire.

By midday, photos of thick smoke billowing from the unit were already circulating on Facebook. Firefighters forced the door open and contained the blaze before it spread to adjacent units. The unit itself, however, was a total loss—almost everything inside was reduced to ashes.

According to the firefighters, the likely cause was the air-conditioning unit, which had been left running while the tenant was away. They noted that the AC appeared unusually old—older than the condo itself—suggesting it may have been defective. Likely one of those, I have an old AC lying around so let's use that to furnish the place.

The tenant denied that leaving the AC on caused the fire.

To be fair, air-conditioners are designed to run for long periods—even continuously. Simply leaving one on shouldn’t automatically lead to a fire.

So who is actually at fault?

Was it the tenant’s responsibility for leaving the unit unoccupied with the AC running?

Or the owner’s fault for supplying an old (and possibly faulty) appliance? Likely one of those situations where an owner thinks, “I have an old AC lying around—might as well use it to furnish the unit,” without fully considering the risks that come with aging electrical appliances.

Then there’s insurance.

A common misconception: the building’s fire insurance typically covers only the structure and common areas—not the contents inside individual units.

That means:

The owner’s policy (if any) may cover the unit’s fixtures and built-ins.

The tenant’s belongings are covered only if the tenant has contents insurance.

If neither party is insured, losses come out of pocket.

So who pays? I don't know.

Lesson

1. Old appliances are silent risks. Tenants should flag them, and owners should replace or properly maintain them.

2. Don’t rely solely on building insurance—it typically covers only the structure, not the contents inside the unit.