Reply With QuoteSurely it's up to the owner of the flat downstairs to pursue a claim through the block insurance policy? Not sure why you'd be involved in that at all.
I need your thoughts please.
I invested in a couple of buy to lets a few years ago. One of the properties is a 3rd floor flat in a purpose built block. A few months ago, the person in the flat below reported a leak from our flat bathroom into his bathroom. The damage/leak was minimal (a hole in the ceiling plasterboard of c. 8 inches and some ceiling paint discolouration).
We informed the managing agent and then the buildings insurer of the matter. When we investigated, we found that there was a leak from a (clean water) pipe behind the toilet. We informed the insurer and they said they would not cover the repair of the cause of the leak, only the damage caused by it.
We have had the leak repaired at our expense and no further leaks have been reported. The chap downstairs wants the whole ceiling replaced along with the extractor, etc. whereas our decorator says we can have the patch filled and painted over.
I have 2 questions : 1) who should be agreeing the scope of the work with the insurer ? I am led to believe it will only be the work on the flat downstairs that can be claimed on, so I have no claim to make. 2) who is responsible for paying the premium?
I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
That was my view also, but he says it is not his fault so he should not have to pay the premium and he is asking me to deal with the claim. To be fair it is not my fault either. It’s not like we deliberately created the leak.
Do you mean the excess? Suggest that you get some advice from the managing agent but your starting position should be that it's not your claim. To my mind the excess is due from the claimant or it gets paid through the service charge (if that's the policy adopted for the block).Originally Posted by Indio
Was it your pipe or a communal pipe that leaked?
Edit - just found this with a very quick search. Read your lease too.
I’m a director of a management company.
Check the lease to make sure who responsibility it is. Clean water behind panels may be management company responsibility ( as may be infrastructure not your demise).
Let your insurance company deal with it.
Importantly, tell the other person what happened and that the insurance company are dealing with it. It’s the not knowing that will make them unreasonable.
I don’t expect an extractor would be replaced unless it was destroyed by the water ingress.
Yes - quite correct, I was referring to the excess, not the premium - apologies.
When I raised the matter of who pays the excess, the managing agent said (in writing) that they are not liable for the excess under the terms of the lease and that it is a matter for the 2 leaseholders to agree. The insurer also said they would not be in a position to opine on who should pay the excess.
Will read the link you sent. Appreciate the feedback
The obvious solution is that you both take responsibility for the excess on your respective claims. That's the stance I'd take but - again - do you know if it was your pipe or a communal pipe? if the latter the other claim literally has nothing to do with you.
Will check with the plumber and take a look at the lease
- - - Updated - - -
Will check with the plumber and take a look at the lease
Don't see that the other party should be out of pocket at all TBH.
Liability lies with OP or management company.
Does the person downstairs claim via their insurance and their insurance company recover the costs from your insurance the same way as a non fault car insurance claim? I wouldn’t have thought they should be left out of pocket as that to me is not reasonable.
Absent anything specific to the contrary in the lease, I'd expect the excess to be covered by the party that is responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the pipe that leaked. That may be OP or could be the management company, albeit noted they have suggested it is not them in this case.
In terms of the repair, the neighbour is under a duty to mitigate loss. If a patch will provide a repair which is fit for purpose then that is the claim, they would need to demonstrate why a patch suggested by a suitable tradesperson will not deliver an invisible and satisfactory repair.
Posting Permissions