Subsidence cover

Dazdot

How worried should we be about the new "Capped indemnity spend" model that is currently being used by "Infront Innovation", a loss adjuster for DLG and Aviva? Their model is to limit spends on subsidence claims to around £4,500.00. Surely this is not acceptable to people that have to claim on their policy and pay an excess of £1.000.00 as they will no doubt end up with a crack repair instead of foundation repairs?
I have spoken to various consultants, contractors and Engineers regarding this and they are all of the opinion that this model is very bad news for the insured.

dacouch

Dazdot wrote: »

How worried should we be about the new "Capped indemnity spend" model that is currently being used by "Infront Innovation", a loss adjuster for DLG and Aviva? Their model is to limit spends on subsidence claims to around £4,500.00. Surely this is not acceptable to people that have to claim on their policy and pay an excess of £1.000.00 as they will no doubt end up with a crack repair instead of foundation repairs?
I have spoken to various consultants, contractors and Engineers regarding this and they are all of the opinion that this model is very bad news for the insured.

I've not heard of this but bearing in mind a proper subsidence claim costs many £10ks I suspect they have a system for dealing with minor subsidence claims eg tree roots in drains or the £4500 cap is just for their professional fees in managing the claim and not the associated costs eg piling

TSx

I've not heard of this either - however I don't think they are limiting the cost of the claim (which would be completely unfair on the insured and makes no sense) - rather they are limiting the cost to the insurer.

Subsidence claims are a lot cheaper than they used to be - foundation repairs are a very last resort, and rarely required once the issue which caused the problem has been solved. The majority of claims I've dealt with have had a repair cost of less than £4500 and underpinning is incredibly rare - but there are generally also costs involved in mitigation, investigation and their fees for handling the claim.

a 'capped indemnity spend' certainly sounds more like their contract with the insurer, rather than any aspect of individual claims - after all, if underpinning is needed, the insurer can't just refuse to pay for it.

rs65

I thought this was how Infront won the contract - limiting insurers spend to Infront rather than limiting insurers spend on repairs.

Makes no sense to have 'unlimited' buildings cover but with a hidden cap of £4500.

OP, why do you ask?

Dazdot

rs65 wrote: »

I thought this was how Infront won the contract - limiting insurers spend to Infront rather than limiting insurers spend on repairs.

Makes no sense to have 'unlimited' buildings cover but with a hidden cap of £4500.

OP, why do you ask?

I ask because of a contact that has confirmed to me that the £4500.00 limit is for the limit of the claim. I am worried in case my property is affected by subsidence in the future and that I may be fobbed off with patch repairs instead of a properly engineered solution.

Is this type of limit against the law, as my policy does not state any monetary limit for subsidence claims?

rs65

£4500 cannot be binding on you. Is your contact suggesting that if a house collapses due to subsidence, the insurers will only pay out £4500?

The limit on your claim will be the buildings sum insured.

Dazdot

TSx wrote: »

I've not heard of this either - however I don't think they are limiting the cost of the claim (which would be completely unfair on the insured and makes no sense).

a 'capped indemnity spend' certainly sounds more like their contract with the insurer, rather than any aspect of individual claims - after all, if underpinning is needed, the insurer can't just refuse to pay for it.

They are limiting the claim I am told and you are right, it is unfair to the insured and I think it could be illegal as limits are not usually set out for subsidence claims.

The capped indemnity won them the right to loss adjust the subsidence claims, if the claim is less than the limit then Infront keep the full amount, if the claim looks to be over the £4,500.00 then infront just carry out basic crack filling and decoration. This is from a very reliable source.

Dazdot

rs65 wrote: »

£4500 cannot be binding on you. Is your contact suggesting that if a house collapses due to subsidence, the insurers will only pay out £4500?

The limit on your claim will be the buildings sum insured.

The limit is on subsidence claims only.

rs65

I can't help thinking your contact has got it wrong.

£4500 may be a cap on fees - rather than repairs.

Dazdot

rs65 wrote: »

I can't help thinking your contact has got it wrong.

£4500 may be a cap on fees - rather than repairs.

I understand your reservation in believing this, I hope you are correct, but I have been assured that it is the claim that is limited.

rs65

If the gable wall of a house collapses due to subsidence, do you think £4500 of crack filling and decoration will fix it?