policy covers tracing water leak from underground pipes not replacing water supply

fairy2

Apologies for long post but some background needed.

Our latest water bill suggested that we had a leak somewhere in our water supply (it was 3 times its normal amount for the last 6 months). The water company took 3.5 months to tell us this from the day they realised there was a leak ( I would have thought they had some kind of obligation to tell consumer within a reasonable amount of time). We were asked to ascertain whether the leak was internal or external which involved us causing some internal damage ensuring things were turned off. In our opinion the leak was external (between the internal stopcock and the water meter) and an appropriate person was sent. I assumed to try to find leak and hopefully repair?

He arrived today and looked at water meter. He brought no tracing equipment. He said it would be would be a waste of time trying to locate any leak as the frontage is so deep. He did not even try to locate the pipes (i.e. where they are and the direction they go). He also said that even if the leak could be found and mended then it would not stop another leak developing in another part in the future. He suggested that we pay to have a new water supply fitted (independently) between the water meter and the internal stop !!!!. This would involve us getting about 130 foot of pipe laid and having it put AROUND the property and in at the back and not under the property as it would be difficult to put a pipe under concrete floors etc. He said any plumber could do this.

I query that as I suspect it is a specialised job and of course any contractor will need to check wgere

We have cover for up to £2.5k to trace a leak from any external underground service pipe outside the home (and £5k for leaks inside the home). At the moment we are not 100% sure about where the leak is but we suspect outside.

Of course there is no specific cover for replacing a water supply - where do you think this leaves us? Do we just pass to the insurers and let them spend that money searching for a leak that the so called "professionals" say they would not trace or fix. I suspect it would not be enough anyway.

What happens when it makes more sense to completely replace a pipe rather than find and then try to mend a pipe? Ironically I suspect the cost may be more for the latter.

Also if insurers go for the find the trace the leak option what about the damage caused by trying to trace? The deep forecourt would be totally ruined - would that be part of the £2.5k which would go nowhere near or would it be a separate claim under the policy for damage - I guess often greater damage is caused while trying to fix issues.

Thanks in advance.

Spikey1

Hi there,

You should ask your insurers whether their Disaster Restoration contractors can trace the leak using thermal imaging technology. If so, that would mean that they wouldn't have to excavate to trace the leak. I'm pretty sure that the likes of Rainbow International, Belfor UK & CleanSafe offer this service. Your insurers are likely to have one of them on their preferred contractor panel.

You should also check your cover to make sure that BOTH trace AND access are covered. If so, then once they have pinpointed where the leak is, they should be able to undertake a precision excavation to access the damaged pipe. The thermal imaging means that they can dig in the right place first time rather than just 'pot luck' so the costs are usually contained.

If the cover includes trace, access AND repair your insurers will also repair the damaged pipe once they've exposed it. If its just trace & access you would have to fund the cost of repairing the pipe yourself but, given that all of the expensive excavation has already been done, then the cost of repairing the pipe itself is usually pretty small. Your insurers would also meet the cost of making good the damage caused during the excavation...all subject to the policy limit of £2500 or £5000.

Insurers will also look for sensible alternative repair methods. So if the thermal imaging suggests that a by-pass would be easier/cheaper I'm sure they would be interested in that. I'd suggest that you put this into their minds just to ensure that its an option that they do not overlook.

Most policies also cover your loss of metered water. So don't forget to claim for the cost of the increased water usage.

Best of luck

fairy2

Thanks so much for this. Exact words:

"we will pay the costs incurred to find the point of escape of....

a water leak from the underground service pipes ..for which you are legally responsible"

We will not pay more than £2.5k for a water leak outside the home".

So think this covers trace and access. It does not specifically cover repair.

However this is an extension to the general cover which says "We will insure the buildings (includes in this definition driveways and underground service pipes and cables, sewers and drains) up to the amount insured against physical loss or physical damage which happens during the period of insurance". Would this general cover not cover all authorised works which the insurers agree (e.g. if there is a huge bill for damage to forecourt - which I am concerned there will be) and not be limited by the £2.5k? Thanks.

Spikey1

Hi there,

The cover for damage to underground services may (or may not) be subject to exclusions. For example many policies exclude damage caused by wear & tear...so if this is the reason why the pipe has leaked AND the policy carried the exclusion then your claim could not be considered under that particular cover. You need to check the exclusions listed against that particular cover BUT ALSO the 'general exclusions' which apply to the whole policy to determine exactly where you stand here.

I have seen policies with no exclusions at all for the damage to UG services too.

The other thing to check is the definition of "Home" which you will also find in the policy. Very often, this means the house, the outbuildings, and all of the external structures (paths , walls, drives etc.) within the boundaries of your property. If that were the case you may actually have £5k cover and not just £2.5k.

If you spend a wee while picking through your policy cover it should become clearer (although it has taken me around 30 years so far !!)

fairy2

disappointing this one on the basis our insurance costs about 3 times that of every other person I know with insurance - would have hooped it was 100% all singing and all dancing - it is not

Home does not cover drives etc.

I have no specific exclusion for UG services. General exclusions for the whole policy cover wear and tear and gradual deterioration. Troubling. Would this not cover most damage to drains, pipes etc unless there was some calamitous event? I know lots pf people that have had drains repaired through insurance - how do they manage to do it then?

Spikey1

This is where you can find yourself in a bit of a Catch 22 situation.

Its often the case that the reason (ie. cause) of the leaking pipe doesn't become apparent until its been exposed. Only then can the insurer determine if an 'external' cause (eg a stone, weight of a parked car, tree roots, fence post etc. etc.) has caused the pipe to break.

I'm surprised that the drive isn't covered .....is it in the definition of "Building" ?. In any event, if the cost of repairing the pipe is covered, then the cost of excavating and reinstating the drive would be classed as a 'necessary cost of repairing the pipe'...so it wouldn't matter that the drive was not part of the definitions...they'd have to pay for it anyway.

The claims are always a bit cumbersome to be honest.

fairy2

You make a v interesting point, In my case I guess age may well be a factor as all drains and pipes will only last a certain life span so ultimately all for e.g. 60 year+ drains will deteriorate. However without knowing where the pipe even is and then where the break is I can not confirm that it is not something else e.g. tree roots.

Yes drive is in definition of building but it is covered by being outside of the "home" but at the address (hence it being within the £2.5k limit). I just wondered if it was possible to bring it within the general cover for damage to buildings hence it not being caught in £2.5k but it being covered as part of the much higher buildings cover.

Thanks.

Spikey1

My instincts tell me that you probably can't do that....although I am not an underwriter.

Looking through your posts it seems like its only the trace & access cover where the drive gets the lower limit. I'd imagine that, for the other perils, the drive benefits from the same sum insured as the rest of the Building ?

The other thing I'd say is that it is by no means 'the norm' for policies to provide trace & access cover (some do, many don't). So your policy is pretty strong in this respect really.

Cheers

Snot

Had a similar issue other than I noticed the leak quite quickly due to the drop in pressure and noise from the inside pipes. The water company offered a fix rate repair but would only dig one hole where they suspected the leak was and wouldn't replace the blocks, if this was the wrong place - hard luck. They came out and told me I had a leak (no kidding, little fountain on the block paving was a give away), they the told me if I didn't fix it within x days they may issue a prohibition notice and cut my supply.
Insurance company said they would cover the damage the water caused (prior to the leak being noticed) but not the repair as it would be wear and tear.
The water company had a list of approved contractors, I called them all and one company replaced ~50ft of pipe under the drive and along the size of the house for ~£350 If I remember rightly. They dug 3 holes and used a mole and re-instated the blocks after. Incidentally, it made a huge difference to the flow rate.
The ground works guys did a brill job, although the plumber never stopped complaining .
Moral of my story is why didn't I replace the pipe when I had the drive installed 5 yrs earlier.
I've been without elec and gas before, neither compares with no water.