Indemnity policy Exclusion clause (Urgent)

Richard_Webster

Quote:
Originally Posted by DVardysShadow
Doozer, I agree with
Indemnity is unlikely to cover works newer than 12 months at inception, because building control may still inspect
The quoted exclusion clause is not relevant
OP is probably not reading the policy in context
There is likely to be another clause [not necessarily an exclusion clause] which [effectively] excludes works newer than 12 months
Original solicitor appears to have been negligent in offering the policy, as evidenced by the waiver admitting the Indemnity policy as the remedy
The only question in my mind is whether the Policy could actually protect works newer than 12 months at inception. You seem quite convinced it would not. What am I missing here?
You're right. I presumed it at the beginning and then the OP quotes the underwriter giving it as their reason for the cover not being provided. I haven't seen the policy wording for what is covered, but having worked for an insurer and knowing that they simple will not cover a blatant new risk, plus the fact that Building Control in particular lose their teeth at 12 months, I have taken it as gospel which I perhaps shouldn't have.

But I'd put money on it.

I don't bet, so I wouldn't out money on it, but I agree with Doozergirl's conclusion - see my post above.

InvalidIndemnity

Thank you very much guys for the responses, I am awaiting my solicitor response, Policy is of 3 pages the first page only states the commencement date and the Exclusion the one I quoted earlier and rest of the pages there is nothing mention which states less than 12 month is not covered. The only reason I have raised this point is I have read it first time and I was in a doubt that I might be covered by the policy then why I am going to sue the solicitor which is being negligent as the case at that will turn against me, so I wanted to be clear on this side otherwise my current solicitor has prepared everything to do the proceedings. I will try and read the policy again and try to paste as much as I can from it.
I actually thought that policy is valid but somehow the insurer said that work is within 12 months and we didn't even notice as there is nothing much mentioned in the policy document which even points out for the work done less than 12 months or may be I missed out something, I will go through that document again and if you guys want I will scan and email it to you guys.
I will go through each of the comments mentioned above from forum advisors and try to response each of them but I am very happy from your advises and time you all have taken to respond my queries.
I will keep you guys updated if my solicitor response was in negative then the only option is to do the court proceeding which is already in place.
Once again thank you so much, all of you have taken very seriously my issue and advised me accordingly and I will keep posting.

Doozergirl

Bless you! I hope it turns out okay for you in the end

InvalidIndemnity

Hi Everyone, I was right and now my solicitor understood my point and agreed with me as there is nothing in the whole document which states that the work fully completed at least 12 months prior to the Date of Commencement, My solicitor has understood my point and he cannot see the wording referred in the policy which has been issued to me. He has telephoned the insurers and asked them to clarify the position and I am waiting for a return call. Finger-crossed let see what happen next..!!

InvalidIndemnity

DoozerGirl, Richard & DVardysShadow you guys are absolutely right in saying that, because my current solicitor told me the exact same thing you guys told me regarding the policy that there should be something in other pages and we should read in the context to get the essence. Now I am waiting for my solicitor response once he will get clarification from the insurers.
Thank you very much for your help and support and I will keep posting the updates..!!

InvalidIndemnity

This is frustrating but it is true. Insurers came back to my solicitor stating the terms and conditions were wrongly sent to me. Insurers have confirmed that the wrong policy Terms and Conditions were annexed to the schedule. They sent the correct copy. Earlier the terms and conditions they sent was under heading "maisonette indemnity policy" which is after the main policy page and now they sent me the correct one which is under heading "Lack of Planning Permission and/or Building Regulations Consent Indemnity Policy". I am just surprised how come they can make mistakes like this as every policy filed under a policy number then how come they sent me the wrong one. Any how it is true that policy is invalid as this is stated under this new terms and conditions which they sent me today :

"It is hereby AGREED that the Underwriters will indemnify the Insured up to the Limit of Indemnity in respect of any loss damages costs and expenses which the Insured may sustain suffer or incur during the Period of Insurance in complying with any enforcement notice or injunctive proceedings served on the Insured by the appropriate planning authority and/or building control authority being directly attributable to the lack of valid planning permission and/or building regulation consent in respect of any works carried out upon the property provided that such work was fully completed at least 12 months prior to the Date of Commencement"

The above wordings were not at all present in any page of the earlier version of the policy they provided and they sent me the wrong terms and conditions.
Let see what happen next, I am awaiting as my solicitior has to initiate the proceedings, I will keep updated if you guys wanted to know more but thank you very much for your help and support that is really nice you guys give me your precious advises.
Thanks is a small word but keep your good work up guys and do pray for me as I don't know how long this proceedings will take place as my solicitor told me it might take years

DVardysShadow

Before you jump in with both feet to deal with the old solicitor, consider the possibility that he was working with the wrong terms. In your position, I would run the possibility past the new solicitor and get this investigated. It might change the way you want to play it.

Doozergirl

OP, I genuinely hope that this does gets sorted for you sooner rather than later. Good Luck.