Home Insurance - Can I reclaim excess from my neighbour?

tracey3596

This may be a bit long-winded, so please bear with me. :A
Any suggestions would be wecome.
Home insurance - contents & building by Axa, through Home Protect.
Legal Assistance added to policy, "just-in-case".

Claimed July2012 for subsidence, caused by neighbour's Leylandii hedge approx. 1metre (3') from end wall of bungalow. Yes, THAT close.
Severe cracking noted to all that end of the building, resulting in movement to walls; windows; internal doors; floor.
Assessors are Crawfords.
"Pins" put in, for measuring (but not been re-measured yet).

The Neighbour? Sold bungalow in November 2012. When he put the property up for sale (approx. 18 months before) he was advised to trim hedging - which he did at the front of his property but NOT the side, which affects my bungalow. I have no proof of this advice from the estate agent, though I have not approached him. The old neighbour refused any contact with insurers. I personally informed his estate agent of my claim.
New neighbour says she was not told, but APPEARS helpful.

INSURERS - my latest contact has said tree experts will visit (not yet been) and have been in contact with new neighbour, with a view to removing the Leylandii and perhaps assisting towards the cost of this.
Meantime, said neighbour has trimmed tree height only from the trees directly next to my bungalow wall - from approx. 6.5m tall (say 20') to approx. 3m (7').

I requested an update from my insurers earlier in the week and am awaiting a reply; meantime I have received a policy renewal; of course, my insurance is now over £200 per year more expensive.
Also, I must pay a statutory £1000 excess.

So- my question:

Is there any way to reclaim costs from my neighbour?

£1000 excess and an extra £200 per year is a significant sum (to me) and it does seem unfair when this claim is a direct result of my neighbour's actions.

NOT my new neighbour, but the old neighbour - who (to be polite) was "odd" and whom I had no communication with.

Any advice would be most welcome.
Thanks to those taking the time to read this.

Quentin

You can try, though if your neighbour was liable for your problem then your insurer would be pursuing them/their insurer for recompense. Ask them whether they are intending to do this.

olly300

1. If the hedge overhangs part of your land you are allowed legally to trim them back to your land boundary if the neighbour refuses to do so. Legally you must offer the trimmings back to your neighbour before you dispose of them.

2. Some of the houses in my area have problems with subsidence from neighbours' trees. Talking to a friend of mine who has had this problem they have had to pay the excess themselves. The reason being is you cannot prove that the neighbour deliberately set out to damage your property by planting the trees there x years ago - and as I stated in 1. you are allowed to trim the trees back on your side.

tracey3596

Thanks for your replies.

Firstly I intend to ask my insurers whether or not they intend to pursue my neighbours for costs; whether or not this was possible was the reason for my post.

I understand that I am allowed to trim my side - however, what I can not do is trim the owner's side; the top; or the roots.
Also I understand that any damage to my property MAY not be intentional.

However, as I stated in my original post, it does TO ME seem unfair that I must bear the burden of costs for something which is the fault of someone else.

For example - if my car is hit by another car and it is accepted (by whatever means) that the other car owner/driver is at fault;
1/ USUALLY the claim is paid by the insurers that owner/driver.

2/ USUALLY I would not have to pay any excess.

3/ USUALLY as the accident and hence the claim was the fault of the other owner/driver, my future insurance premiums (no-claims) would not be affected.

So why the difference for home insurance? :mad:

Not wishing to sound facetious BUT it's a little like saying "but I didn't mean to hit your car"!
So lose your no-claims, pay your excess and watch your premiums go up!

Hence my original question.

Quentin

The situation is not as you describe.

In any claim, you pay for your own repairs unless another party has been negligent.

If there has been no negligence, then although you are blameless, you cannot claim off the third party. The easiest example is if the third party driver has an unexpected seizure whilst driving, loses control and collides with another car. No negligence, so no liability.

You need to prove your neighbour has been negligent to be able to claim off them.

rs65

tracey3596 wrote: »

So why the difference for home insurance? :mad:

Its no different.

Its a legal liability issue.

Three issues:-

Prove that you have suffered a loss -- tick
Quantify that loss -- tick
Prove that the loss was caused by someone's negligence -- mmm, not so easy.

Proving negligence in a car accident is much easier. It is possible for you and your insurers to recover your outlays, but you need to be able to prove your neighbour's negligence caused your loss.

tracey3596

Okay, it's becoming more clear now thank you.

It seems that the key word so far is "negligence".
Or - to be more accurate - PROVING negligence.

So - is it possible that planting a Leylandii hedge directly upon a boundary, within 1metre of my property negligent? (Yes, I know; doubtful.)

Perhaps allowing this hedge to grow to over 6 metres high could be negligent?

Would even a general survey of the neighbour's property upon a sale comment in any way about the possibility of the hedge causing problems? Presuming, of course, that any survey was done.

Do you think that the estate agent involved in the sale of my neighbour's property would admit to recommending my former neighbour trim his hedge - and would this make any difference perhaps in proving negligence?

I spoke to the person trimming the neighbour's hedge over 2 years ago now, and he told me that the estate agent had advised the trimming of the hedges. As I said before, my neighbour then allowed the trimming of his front - but NOT the side which affects my property.

So, from the above, anyone have any ideas?

Quentin

You will have a problem proving negligence - leylandii border hedges are common.

The estate agent's hedge trimming advice would be for aesthetic reasons, to aid the sale, not for any legal reasons. Just like advising a vendor the kitchen would look better if decorated.

The height may be considered anti social!

rs65

You are getting into a hugely complex area.

Might be best posting in the house owning section or greenfingered section of the forum. Being negligent depends on lots of things such as their knowledge and the reasonably foreseeable outcome of their actions or inactions. Just because they were told to trim the hedge doesn't mean that your damage would have been known to them as a likely outcome. If however they were a professional gardener, then they should've known better.

tracey3596

Hmmm .... so as my former neighbour was a maintenance worker for a holiday/caravan site (a large, national company) who's duties involved both gardening and basic maintenance .... :cool:

I will wait for a reply from my insurers and also look for a legal forum and seek more-specialist advice; meanwhile I would welcome any further input - especially from other forumites who may have experienced similar. :T

rs65

tracey3596 wrote: »

I will wait for a reply from my insurers

Remember, your insurers will also want to pursue their outlay if at all possible. Good luck.