I chose an AXA insurance & now I homeless

norwichmanneil

Three years ago today a water main burst in the road which washed away the foundations to the front and side of my house. By evening the house was unsafe and I had to get out leaving everything in the house. It was decided that the house was beyond economic repair and the house was demolished.

The house was valued at £125,000 AXA have offered me £40,284

I had no mortgage and am aged 56. I now have to rent with no prospects of getting another house as £40,000 will buy nothing. I now face a additional £500+ rent each month for the rest of my life.

How can this be?

I got my home insurance policy from a comparison website. Buildings cover I took the advice and covered the cost of “rebuilding you home, outbuildings, walls & fences” and set this to £127,000 (I have conformation by the engineer working on my house that is was a fair amount). I bought to policy and it also listed the Buildings as only the rebuild costs on the ABC Summery. But there is another policy booklet. On Page 33 of this booklet it adds a new clause to the buildings cover, Limit of 10% to cover for Debris Removal, demolishing, shoring up & Building Fees (Plans, architect, consultant fees). Like most people the first time I knew about this was after the claim. So the Building cover should been described as the cost of “rebuilding your home, outbuildings, walls and fences, 10x cost of “Debris Removal, demolishing, shoring up & Building Fees”. As my house had to be demolished all the fees fell into this new 10% clause reducing my offer to £40,000. For information they spent £99,415.88 in costs. This would require a Building cover of £1 million pounds for a house worth £120,00.

To me this is a classic case of a policy not fit for purpose. You get insurance to cover you for such cases. I was at no fault and yet my AXA policy could not cope with this type of accident.

To me this is a classic case of a policy hiding unfair & confusing small print. Such important clauses should be highlighted when the policy is bought. How an average person could be expected to understand just how much these cost could be difficult to understand.

A final thought

The law is quite clear stating that the Water Company whose pipe burst is liable for all the costs. I know AXA will claim their money back. So if they will get it back how can they claim money back from me for money they will not have spent?

attila_

If you didn't have a mortgage i assume you owned the house outright. Therefore the water company is liable to you for damage, not AXA or any other third party.

dacouch

You can still sue the water company for the balance of the costs to rebuild the house

TurnUpForTheBooks_2

Your story is unbelievable, norwichmanneil. Have AXA really just demolished the house and finally offered you £40,000 ?

Was that some special offer that allowed you to keep the land and excuses them the need to rebuild ?

Did you simply want them to indemnify you i.e. fix the damage to put you back in a rebuilt house on the same plot? Did they refuse to do that?

Did they pay to rehouse you for any period?

Who managed the claim for AXA - is it a national firm of loss adjusters?

You say you have an engineer on site - who employs him?

What a sorry tale to hear.

Sounds like this will be the third Christmas you have had with the problem. That's crazy.

I have found a copy of the AXA ABC Home Insurance Policy Wording and seen page 33 as you mentioned. I have also found a copy of an FCA ruling attacking that same particular wording in another respect and ruling it to contain unfair contract terms. That is highly unusual in itself. It is perhaps of only passing interest, but does you policy fit the description "‘Home Insurance’ for policy numbers beginning 42000 and new policies in 2011 or ‘Home Insurance Policy Booklet January 2009 edition’ for policy numbers beginning ADH000?"

I think most readers would be wondering how on earth did AXA get into the position of spending £100,000 in fees alone against a £127,000 Sum Insured buildings policy claim and end up with no house on the site in 3 years, especially as you say, if the water company did the damage. Broadly, by what course of decisions did AXA spend so much money and make no progress?

It just doesn't make sense if that is the simple story. AXA would surely be sparing no expense if there was an easy subrogation to enable the money to be reimbursed by the water company? I wonder if there is some conflict of interest lurking? Some water companies are French. AXA is French - there is a sporting chance maybe AXA lead the insurances for the Water company? But that normally would not cause a difficulty - you would expect them to be way above that kind of thing.

Can you tell us more about what has gone on in the past 3 years?

Spikey1

Good God !


How on Earth can your insurers spend so much on debris removal, fees etc ?


Can I assume that your insurers (or their appointed Adjusters) have been project managing this ? If so my instincts are telling me that this has been mis-managed and the insurance funds spent recklessly. If that's the case then the Insurers need to take responsibility for their incompetence and take the hit themselves for their overspend.


If its you that has been project managing then I could understand the Insurers stance.


Can you tell us more ?

norwichmanneil

The report stating the house could not be rebuilt came out in April. Time passed and nothing was going on so I rang the ombudsman service out of frustration. They raised a complaint which AXA acknowledged but to this day AXA have never bothered to answer. I finally go them to hold a meeting in November to start the demolition of the house.

I was paying for my own alternative accommodation (see separate post) and when they finally knocked down the hose I was issued with two eviction notices for me to my to leave my alternative accommodation. After the fist eviction notice I just paid the deposit to remove AXA and countrywide for my accommodation as I had nowhere to go or any money to buy another property.

At regular intervals I would ring and ask what is going on. Each time I was told that it was being sorted.

I even rang the AXA complaint line to make a complaint. I was asked “why are you ringing us”. Still I persisted and waited. More than 8 weeks later no one contacted me so I rang again to make another complaint. I was told some one tried to ring me the fist day but my phone was engaged. This time someone promised to ring me back each day until he had an answer. I only lasted a few days and more than 8 weeks passed (I was testing for the 8 week deadline). Rang up and finally someone took notice and on the 12 December 2013 I got an email offering me my £40,000. They also kindly backdated the end of the claim to May 2012 with a extra period to 22/7/2013 so I could look for new properties to rent.

From day one I have always refuted the 10% rule stating that it make the policy not fit for purpose/ not as described.

You just could not make this stuff up, no one would believe it.

TurnUpForTheBooks_2

You mention "My £40,000" as if you negotiated it.

As a matter of interest how was it arrived at?

Unfortunately I think those of us reading this Neil are a bit confused about how it has all come about.

You said the original damage happened 3 years ago.

Did you have to move out immediately? I see from your other post that you did, but your alternative accommodation arrangements seem very DIY bearing in mind most of us would expect that up to say 20% of the original buildings sum insured ought to be available for alternative accommodation and you had an established national loss adjuster Crawfords overseeing the claim.

I don't understand what you mean by "backdating the end of the claim to May 2012". How can the claim even have ended now if the house has not been rebuilt?

From what you just said it looks like you received some kind of alternative accommodation support from AXA for over 2½ years from 24.12.2010 until 22.07.2013? But you mention being evicted after the house was finally knocked down. When was it finally knocked down? Who instructed it to be knocked down? Do you still own the land?

Spikey1

On the Alternative Accommodation issue....do you have Contents cover ? If so, you may have more cover available there.


As for the Buildings insurance I'd strongly recommend that you appoint someone to represent your interests. A meeting is needed with the reps of AXA & Crawfords where they can explain everything. I would also be making a DPA request so that both AXA & Crawfords have to provide copies of their records to your own representative so that a full interrogation can be carried out.


You could appoint an Assessor but they are very expensive and you would have to pay their fees so you should bear that in mind.


Alternatively you can go back to the FOS.....they will get to the bottom of it for you but it can be a slow process. If they find in your favour you will be awarded the full settlement that they judge you are entitled to PLUS 8% interest per year for the delays you have suffered.


You didn't answer my question as to who was project managing the investigations/work/demolitions at your damaged home. Was this the Insurers/Adjusters or was it yourself ?


If the Adjusters/Insurers have just recklessly spent the insurance funds with no foresight of the shortfall and the consequences of this, then they have mis-managed the situation and left you with no options. They will have to take responsibility for this.


You seem to be implying that instead of spending a maximum of £12,700 on debris removal, demolition, fees...they have spent over £90,000.....that's their fault not yours surely? You should always have been left with the £127,000 rebuild cost to spend on rebuilding the house itself ?


It may be the case that the story is much more complicated than this and that there is 'another side' to hear.....that's why you need some representation.


All the best

iainscomputer

I really feel for your situation & understand how frustrated you must feel, I think the other posters have made some good comments.
All I would add is AXA insurance have been reprimanded recently for unfair decisions that they have made. I read this in The Daily Mail within the last month. Basically profits were down & they were making very unfair judgements at policyholders expense.
I wish you luck in sorting out this horrible situation.

norwichmanneil

Thank you all for your posts it good to know i am not alone. Will replay tomorrow with requested information.

Happy Christmas every one and thanks for your time.

Neil

SammenForLivet2

Hello Neil

Firstly, I'm sorry to hear the circumstances described, I'm sure that I would be upset if that happened to me too, particularly as I'm insured with AXA.

I see that you mentioned that you're telephoning AXA when making your complaint. Due to the amounts involved on this complaint, I would seriously advise that you make your complaint in writing, so you've got a trace and record of what's said, even if it's e-mail, and you can take this to the ombudsman, if needs be.

As a previous poster has said, I'm a little bit confused too - maybe I'm just a little too tired after Christmas, but my understanding is that AXA have offered £40,000 as full and final payment of your claim, with interest back-dated to 2012, as a gesture of goodwill. Please correct me if I'm wrong?

Perhaps you could post an edited copy of AXA's email (taking away all your personal information for your protection), so we get a full grasp of what's going on?

Finally, I wish you good luck with your claim.

Seasons Greetings