House Insurance claims

zoonie55

We own a ground floor flat which is insured through the Bank of Scotland.Our upstairs neighbour had a leak from their bath which has damaged our bathroom roof.The owner was very pleasant but his insurers advised that we get in touch with ours. B of S now say that we will have to pay £500 excess for repairs - £250 voluntary excess + £250 for water damage. I can't understand why we are having to pay £500 when we were not at fault.Apparently we would have to prove that our neighbour was negligent.It's a small bathroom and we will probably be cheaper paying for repairs ourself, but who's to say this won't happen again. Has anyone else been in this situation? Advice would be appreciated

TSx

Unfortunately, that is correct - unless there is negligence (and it can be proven on the balance of probability) then the cost falls down to you. Have you spoken to your neighbours about contributing? Some are willing to even though they don't have a legal liability.

InsideInsurance

You mention "its not our fault". To be anyone's fault you have to show they were negligent, how was your upstairs neighbour negligent?

In 99% of these sorts of cases it is simply an accident and therefore no ones fault, unlike car crashes which is probably 99.9% of the time someones fault. Where there is no fault each party has to resolve their own losses.

zoonie55

Thanks for your reply.My neighbours bathroom floor is rotten and there is evidence that the bath sealant has been faulty for some time. This was not an overnight escape of water. Does that not show negligence? If it were a simple case of a damp patch on the ceiling we would fix it ourself but we are not sure if there is damage to joists.What's to say this wont happen again once it's repaired and we have to pay out again. My insurance have agreed to send out a surveyor to assess the damage and we'll take it from there. I'm not sure what you mean about" each party resolve their own losses " A tube of bath sealant is not going to cost him £500.

InsideInsurance

I didn't say it would but that is the general luck (or lack of it element), just like the person's sky dish that gets blown off the wall in tornado and hits the neighbours Merc at 70mph.

If you can provide evidence that the problem was clear for any layperson to see and that they had had a reasonable period of time to resolve it then you would have evidence of negligence. Obviously need to see what exactly the floor looked like with the tiles/ carpet/ lino down + the bath panel in place and take a judgement on if a layperson would realise the rot is due to escape of water rather than just natural wear and tear of the flooring