Need advice in regard to factors building insurance

usermay2011

Hi

I'm looking for some info and advice on buildings insurance through a factor. Say you have property damage from a while ago but it has only just been made aware to you that you should claim for damages so you dont have to pay through the roof for the damages. However the factoring company says the damage looks old and there have been a couple of changes in insurance company in the past year or so so you wouldn't get a claim is there anything you can do?

Seems unfair that they can just decide how old a damage looks and then decide that you wouldn't get the claim.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

huckster

With hidden damage that the homeowner could not have been aware of and the time of the event is uncertain, I believe it is expected that the current Insurers deal with the claim.

Suggest that you make a complaint and involved the Financial ombudsman service if necessary.

This is what is expected and comes from the FSA handbook that Insurers should follow. The point is that at the point of placing the risk with the last Insurer, you were not aware of any risks that you should declare e.g no existing damage. Being that you had damage for which you had no knowledge of and the date of this damage is uncertain, the current Insurers have to get on with it. To not do so, is putting you at a disadvantage, as you cannot go back to a previous Insurer, as you have no proof of the damage occuring while they were the Insurers.
COBS 8.1.1 06/01/2008 1An insurer must: (1) handle claims promptly and fairly;
(2) provide reasonable guidance to help a policyholder make a claim and appropriate information on its progress;
(3) not unreasonably reject a claim (including by terminating or avoiding a policy); and
(4) settle claims promptly once settlement terms are agreed.

ICOBS 8.1.2 06/01/2008 A rejection of a consumer policyholder's claim is unreasonable, except where there is evidence of fraud, if it is for: (1) non-disclosure of a fact material to the risk which the policyholder could not reasonably be expected to have disclosed; or
(2) non-negligent misrepresentation of a fact material to the risk; or
(3) breach of warranty or condition unless the circumstances of the claim are connected to the breach and unless (for a pure protection contract):
(a) under a 'life of another' contract, the warranty relates to a statement of fact concerning the life to be assured and, if the statement had been made by the life to be assured under an 'own life' contract, the insurer could have rejected the claim under this rule; or
(b) the warranty is material to the risk and was drawn to the customer's attention before the conclusion of the contract.

usermay2011

Many thanks huckster this has given a glimmer of hope.

Cheers for your quick reply.