House not constructed properly!!

vaio

Gra76 wrote: »

Contrary to popular belief this isn't how insurance companies work......

Generally "popular belief" is based on experience and in the OPs case seems to be exactly how they are working. It's one of the reasons the FOS are overwhelmed with cases.

Gra76 wrote: »

....With roofs it's not always black and white though, there are quite a few shades of grey and any surveyor that gets involved in the claim will have to decide on each claim based on what is there to look at. I would have expected them to at least get on the roof and do a proper inspection though, taking a photo from a car doesn't sound very professional to me.....

Agree about the professionalism although it depends on the objective, if the idea is to pay what's due then a proper inspection is needed, if it's to avoid paying in any event then a photo from the ground is fine

Gra76 wrote: »

....The surveyor would have taken photos of any areas of the property that were in a poor state of repair/decoration for future purposes. For instance, if I go and see a property and the lounge decor is in a very poor state then the insurers would expect me to take a photo of it to show what condition it was in at the time I visited. Now, if the owner of that property puts a claim in 6 months later for a water leak from a radiator above the lounge and they are claiming for decorations, there are some insurance companies that might say they wouldn't pay for it as it would have needed doing anyway. Some would agree to do it, but it's at the discretion of the insurers.

This does concern me, by what right do you or an insurance company take photographs of a private unrelated part of the property as part of a claims inspection? Particularly as in the case of the OP it seems to have been done surreptitiously

Gra76

Generally "popular belief" is based on experience and in the OPs case seems to be exactly how they are working. It's one of the reasons the FOS are overwhelmed with cases.

The FOS highlights the number of complaints, some of which will be valid and will be upheld, some of which won't and will be dismissed. You never get the flip-side of the coin and hear about the number of satisfied policyholders, of which in my experience there are a lot of, born out by a number of files full of compliments letters sitting in our office. People are always quick to complain but not so quick to compliment. It's human nature. I do exactly the same when something I'm not expecting happens to me (ask my local Ford dealership about that one, they have more than a couple of letters from me...but that's a story for another time!)

When people don't get what they want they perceive it to be unfair, whether that's the case or not is up to the FOS of course. You'd be surprised what people will complain about. I've spoken to people who've put complaints in to the FOS for things that it clearly states in the policy booklet are specifically NOT covered. They complained because they haven't read the policy, or in most cases assumed it covered absolutely all eventualities. It's no shock to learn the FOS are busy!

Agree about the professionalism although it depends on the objective, if the idea is to pay what's due then a proper inspection is needed, if it's to avoid paying in any event then a photo from the ground is fine

I've no idea who the surveyor who came worked for but if it was for any of the insurers we work for they'd be in trouble for not putting up a ladder and a roof crawler to get up there and do the inspection properly. There's no agenda by any insurer that says "Regardless of if it's covered in the policy then turn it down". I can't think of any insurer that wants to have a high number of complaints.

My advice would to the OP would be to call the insurer and ask them to send someone out to do a proper inspection. A photo from ground level doesn't tell you anything other than the ridge tiles are no longer there. I'd go back to the insurer before the FOS in the first instance. If they don't send someone out to do a proper roof report then take it further.

This does concern me, by what right do you or an insurance company take photographs of a private unrelated part of the property as part of a claims inspection? Particularly as in the case of the OP it seems to have been done surreptitiously

I could have made my previous post clearer I think.

Generally speaking this is not required, I can only think of a very small number of very exceptional cases where I've had to do it.

We're talking about the most neglected of houses, not the majority of them. 99.99% of properties I've visited don't fall into this bracket.

Some insurers will make a deduction if things like decorations are neglected, and by neglected I mean literally ripped and hanging off the wall or graffiti'd all over. This would only apply if a claim was made that concerned this particular area in the future. I'd consider taking a photo of it only if it was in such a bad condition that it would make a difference to any claim we'd be involved in later on. In the case of my previous post I should have made that clearer. As I say, this is in very exceptional circumstances.

In the case of the OP, I've not seen the area in question so I don't know if there would have been any point in taking a photo or not. Maybe the guy that turned up was being overly picky? I'm not trying to defend what happened by any means as without speaking to the person in question or seeing the area I don't know his reasons, I'm trying to point out why he might have done it.

vaio

Gra76 wrote: »

........This would only apply if a claim was made that concerned this particular area in the future. I'd consider taking a photo of it only if it was in such a bad condition that it would make a difference to any claim we'd be involved in later on........

So, you feel comfortable taking photographs of private sections of the inside of people’s homes, unrelated to the claim you are evaluating on the off chance that it will allow rejection/reduction of some hypothetical claim that might happen at some indeterminate time in the future?

As before, by what right do you do this and which insurance companies instruct/encourage you to do so or are these photos taken on your own initiative?

Gra76

I've no issues with taking photo's of any part of anyone's home, I have to do it when the reports are supplied to the insurers for the audit trail anyway, although these would of course only include the photographs of the relevant areas. As for why I do it, well that's my decision to do so, and on the extremely rare ocassion I've considered it needed to be done I've had a reason to do it (for instance if the policyholder has suggested they'd be trying to claim for it at some point) and I always ask if it's ok to take a photo of it at the time. I think you're assuming that this is something that happens all the time when I've already stated it clearly isn't. As I said before it's in extremely rare cases. As far as I'm concerned if it heads off potential insurance fraud before it happens I don't have a problem with it, and oddly neither do the policyholders I've spoken to.

Myrr

Hello everyone, once again thank you for everyone's advise, it has helped me enormously think over things particularly now I am a bit calmer.

As expected yesterday we got the letter turning down our claim, again as expected the reasons were given about the upkeep of our stair - apparently the man who visited noted some of the mortar was coming away from the behind the facings under the door, I'm not in the habit of removing these but my seven year old son recently accomodated us by kicking it so when I went on my knees I could see what he meant. Anyway I wasn't claiming for this as I would see that as something my step dad would help me with - we've been talking about redoing the stairs anyway.

The other reason referred to mortar on the ridge tiles, they say his photograph shows these were not mortared on correctly.

We got a builder to come out and have been given a very reasonable quote for our damage - £240 (some of the local builders are asking for up to £400 a tile). I won't quote verbatim what the builder said when I asked for his general opinion of the state of the roof and mortar but he said the roof was in good condition and there were no issues about how it was put together as far as he was concerned. He was furious that the man who came didn't go on the roof and said the damage was only down to the storm.

My mother in law who is paying for the repair has begged me not to pursue things but to change company at my renewal as if I don't do this it will not be seen as a claim, but it will won't it? She also felt it wasn't worth my while as it is for such a small amount and doesn't want to be paid back however that annoys me because I don't want to think they can get away with this.

The builders we have employed hope to get the roof repaired as soon as possible but they are very busy due to all the damage in the local area AND of course the wind has risen again. I'm terrified we'll end up with more damage now.


On the good news front the insurance company's letter indicated we were still insured and strongly encouraged us to get the roof fixed as soon as possible

Myrr

I meant to mention another issue some people locally are experiencing, some insurance companies aren't even sending people round to do look at the damage but basing claims by looking at the roofs of the houses on google maps, lol at least I got a visit.

VictorM_2

They are far more likely to be basing their decisions on local weather station data and your description of the damage.

Bearing in mind that most Google Streetview photos are 3 or 4 years old - have you ever tried to find a particular house using that? it is a pain in the !!! that's for sure as you can barely ever read the house numbers.

The only reason it would ever be used (at a good insurance company) is to just get a general overview of the land - especially if the customer when asked to describe what is wrong can only provide information like "that bit to the left of my window", "the pointy things above my door" etc.

mikey72

Myrr wrote: »

Hello everyone, once again thank you for everyone's advise, it has helped me enormously think over things particularly now I am a bit calmer.

As expected yesterday we got the letter turning down our claim, again as expected the reasons were given about the upkeep of our stair - apparently the man who visited noted some of the mortar was coming away from the behind the facings under the door, I'm not in the habit of removing these but my seven year old son recently accomodated us by kicking it so when I went on my knees I could see what he meant. Anyway I wasn't claiming for this as I would see that as something my step dad would help me with - we've been talking about redoing the stairs anyway.

The other reason referred to mortar on the ridge tiles, they say his photograph shows these were not mortared on correctly.

We got a builder to come out and have been given a very reasonable quote for our damage - £240 (some of the local builders are asking for up to £400 a tile). I won't quote verbatim what the builder said when I asked for his general opinion of the state of the roof and mortar but he said the roof was in good condition and there were no issues about how it was put together as far as he was concerned. He was furious that the man who came didn't go on the roof and said the damage was only down to the storm.

My mother in law who is paying for the repair has begged me not to pursue things but to change company at my renewal as if I don't do this it will not be seen as a claim, but it will won't it? She also felt it wasn't worth my while as it is for such a small amount and doesn't want to be paid back however that annoys me because I don't want to think they can get away with this.

The builders we have employed hope to get the roof repaired as soon as possible but they are very busy due to all the damage in the local area AND of course the wind has risen again. I'm terrified we'll end up with more damage now.


On the good news front the insurance company's letter indicated we were still insured and strongly encouraged us to get the roof fixed as soon as possible

I'd still refer it to the FOS for the price of a stamp.
And yes you have made a claim, you'll have to declare it in the future anyway.