Wrongly refused contents insurance due to 'flood risk'

Diddy_B

Hello

I live in a second floor flat in a block of flats next to a river that has a history of flooding. The property itself has never been affected by flooding – indeed given its position on the second floor there'd have to be a flood of Biblical proportions for us and our contents to be affected. However, I've always been at great pains to emphasise our circumstances when dealing with insurance companies as I wouldn't want to do anything to invalidate the policy (contents, not buildings). Over the years this has resulted in lots of to-ing and fro-ing between underwriters and the insurers, but we've never been refused contents insurance.

Today, however, after a 45-minute conversation with Endsleigh whilst attempting to renew our policy (after being put on hold seven times) it finally transpired that my house contents couldn't be insured because of the flat's proximity to the river. Even though I'm on the second floor Endsleigh refuse to insure me because this is their 'policy' and always has been. So not only do I have to sift through other insurers for another policy, but now it seems that my property has NEVER been insured - and that had I made a claim it would have been invalid because I am next to a river.

Anyone else had this problem? Endsleigh seem to think that they're not alone in adopting this policy. And why am I being penalised even though my flat's contents would NEVER be at risk? Have I basically just wasted five years' premiums on a policy that was invalid?

Captainblunder

Write to them stating your circumstances, and stating that as you have not been insured by them for the past 5 years you assume that they will be returning your premiums as you have been paying for a service that (a) by their own admission you did not receive, and (b) by their own admission they were not in a position to sell or provide to you.

raskazz

Captainblunder wrote: »

Write to them stating your circumstances, and stating that as you have not been insured by them for the past 5 years you assume that they will be returning your premiums as you have been paying for a service that (a) by their own admission you did not receive, and (b) by their own admission they were not in a position to sell or provide to you.

Why would the OP assume that premiums would be returned, unless he disclosed to them the correct information at inception? If the correct details were not disclosed, the policy is voidable at the insurer's option - they do not have to avoid the policy, they can just enforce cancellation.

magpiecottage

You do seem to be in a position to argue that they are admitting to selling you unsuitable policies for the last five years because the policies would not have met your claims.

A complaint should therefore produce one of two outcomes:

They refund all your premiums (plus interest at 8% per annum simple interest)

or they do not uphold your complaint, which is tantamount to admitting you should have been offered cover. If that happens, you can still claim redress because the misinformation given to you had to be disclosed to an alternative insurer who accordingly raised their premium.

It is a pain and likely to take some time but I suspect that it is a case of heads you win, tails they lose.

Don't wait for them to sort it out before getting alternative cover but make clear that you are dissatisfied and want the matter referred to their complaints procedure, though.

Captainblunder

The OP states that they have been at great pains to disclose all material facts to the insurance companies. As Magpie states either they have not been insuring the property whilst taking your premiums, in violation of their own policies, in which case I believe you would be entitled to a refund of your premiums. Or they deny your claim as they state that you have been provided cover for the past 5 years, in which case you can ask why they won't provide cover now!

Either way it will take some time, and a lot of letters! A best case scenario might be the offer of some compensation either for your wasted premiums or wasted time. However it won't help in the short term so find an alternative insurer and make sure they cover!

Bunter_2

I too live in an upper floor flat within a few hundred yards of a river (The Irish Sea, actually) and it has not been a problem so far as contents insurance is concerned.

On my policy application it just asks "Do you live within 400 metres of a watercourse, such as a river"? I answer "Yes" and do not feel obliged to labour the point.

I appreciate you want to be upfront about the history of flooding but so long as you answer the questions truthfully why risk spooking them when, as you say, it is highly unlikely that your contents will ever suffer [river] flood damage.

So far as the previous five years of premiums are concerned I am in complete agreement with "SELDEN" here. You cannot state with certainty that the insurers would not have paid out on a claim for, say, fire damage, or even internal flooding from a domestic water supply. Insurers are obliged to follow certain rules and cannot just arbitrarily void policies made in good faith.

dunstonh

I cant see grounds for reclaim as in the event of a claim they would have paid out. If they accept that they should not have offered cover but due to their error they would have met any claim then no refund of premiums should be due as the risk was there to the insurer.

If the insurer insist that the property was never covered and they wouldnt have paid out then they are not accepting the risk period and they should refund all premiums.

ANGLICANPAT

Insurers seem very unreasonable when it comes to contents insurance and flats. We had trouble finding a mainstream company to provide contents insurance for a 3rd floor flat , just because the house the flat is within , suffered minor subsidence years ago. Similarly stupid to Endleighs decision on your flat in my opinion.

Diddy_B

Thank you so much for all the replies. I have written to Endsleigh outlining the situation and have said that if it transpires that I have been sold unsuitable policies for the last five years then I most definitely would like to be refunded! I'm sure that there's not a hope in hell that they'll admit to it, but I've referred it to the complaints department and we'll see what happens.

I'll let you know...