Home Insurance for property in flood risk area, previous owner mentioned flooding

lkjlkjlkj

Hi there. I have a property near the river, had it since end of 2011. Along with the conveyancing documents, there was a letter from the previous owner saying the garage had flooded a decade ago.

1) If when applying for home insurance, I say that to the best of my knowledge and belief, that the property has never flooded (indeed, that letter aside, I have seen no evidence. It is just the previous owner's word. I have seen no photos etc), will that come back to bite me in the !!! if I ever make a claim? Will they have a team of people scouring copies of my conveyancing documents to look for 'evidence' of flooding, and see that letter as being irrefutable proof that I'm a liar? Obviously I have no idea if the previous owner made a claim.

2) Last year, when searching for quotes, I told Aviva that there was an incident of flooding, the one mentioned by the previous owner. That made my quote go sky high. Today, I called them again, and because I got a quote from them before, they still had my information on their system, so just had to verify some info. Interestingly however, the guy on the phone did not mention "and the garage flooded in 2002? Correct?" This surprised me. I expected to get a worse quote than the previous year. He just asked "and the property has never suffered from subsidence, flooding etc correct?" and I kept silent. The quote that he then generated was very good.

I expect that if I go forward with that quote, somewhere along the way in their system a flag will be raised saying "this is NONONO flooded property now TRIPLE the premium", but I'm hoping I'm wrong. Any idea if I am?

3) Lastly. If they do still have my postcode down as having flooded once, is it possible for me to change my mind and say, no actually, my property has never flooded, to the best of my knowledge/belief (that's actually more honest. I honestly think that at the beginning I was being naive for insisting that it flooded before. Shot myself in the foot there).

Thanks in advance for any help you can give...

forgotmyname

You can tell them no it has never flooded but the big IF.. You ever need to claim they can check back and find it has flooded and refuse your claim and cancel your policy.

Why waste money for them not to payout. You may as well as not bother with insurance if the information you gave them is false.

He asked you a question and you chose to stay silent instead of correcting them.

Yorkie1

I don't think you'll get very far on the basis of "I stayed silent" - you're under a duty to tell the truth.

I don't know whether the CUE insurance database records home insurance claims but if it does, then there is likely to be a record of the previous flooding claim on there. This, combined with the fact that you have previously declared the flooding, is likely to mean that you could well be found out if you ever have to claim in the future.

A refused claim would not only be expensive in that regard, but would have to be declared for all future insurance applications, and if the information was placed on the National Hunter anti-fraud database, you'd find it really difficult to get basic credit etc.

It's just not worth the risk. Plus, obtaining insurance via false information is fraud - criminal.

lkjlkjlkj

Thanks for your replies.

you're under a duty to tell the truth.

My point is that I am not 100% sure that the property flooded, it's just the previous owner's word. And I have zero reason to believe that a claim was made. Does what I'm proposing to do necessarily equate to giving false information?

You ever need to claim they can check back and find it has flooded

But how would they confirm it? Would that letter from the previous owner be deemed enough? It's just a person's word, surely...

Thanks again...

rs65

lkjlkjlkj wrote: »

And I have zero reason to believe that a claim was made. Does what I'm proposing to do necessarily equate to giving false information?

You weren't asked if a claim was made - you were asked if the property has suffered from flooding.

You have a duty to answer questions accurately.

Yorkie1

lkjlkjlkj wrote: »

Thanks for your replies.



My point is that I am not 100% sure that the property flooded, it's just the previous owner's word. And I have zero reason to believe that a claim was made. Does what I'm proposing to do necessarily equate to giving false information?



But how would they confirm it? Would that letter from the previous owner be deemed enough? It's just a person's word, surely...

Thanks again...

TBH, I think you are being disingenuous.

Why on earth would a previous owner go to the trouble of writing that letter if it wasn't true? It would have been a high-risk strategy, potentially leading to loss of a sale.

lkjlkjlkj

You weren't asked if a claim was made - you were asked if the property has suffered from flooding.

Yes but I only have one person's word to go on. *I* honestly have no idea if it suffered from flooding. Just that someone said it did.

You have a duty to answer questions accurately

This is my point. If I'm not sure that what the previous owner said is accurate (because I have seen no other proof) surely the most accurate answer is "to the best of my knowledge, no".

Why on earth would a previous owner go to the trouble of writing that letter if it wasn't true? It would have been a high-risk strategy, potentially leading to loss of a sale.

That does not constitute proof that it happened...

In any case I contacted the previous owner. No claim related to flooding was ever made. Is there really any convincing reason I should say "yes the property flooded". It feels like I'm just giving them a free lunch.

I wish to reiterate - I'm not trying to be disingenuous, in fact I'm doing my best to stay closest to the truth. I believe that my originally telling them the property flooded was not based on 100% reliable information; therefore, more disingenuous than what I'm proposing.

I think it was stupid of me to assume that the words of the previous owner could be taken as absolute truth.

I know it might 'sound' disingenuous, but I'm really trying to focus on the facts here. Put it this way, perhaps the previous owner also said that the Christian God exists. Does that suddenly mean it's true?

Is there anybody here who works in the insurance industry and can give me a definitive answer? I don't know if any of the people who have replied so far are.

rs65

lkjlkjlkj wrote: »

Is there anybody here who works in the insurance industry and can give me a definitive answer? I don't know if any of the people who have replied so far are.

30+ years in the insurance industry.

You have a letter advising of the flood. The previous owner has told you no claim was made for the flood.

How can you doubt there was a flood.

To the best of your knowledge it was flooded.

dacouch

Do you realise that some areas are prone to river flooding and others are not. The ones prone to flooding have always been prone to flooding unless preventative action was taken. Areas with a history of flooding generally have this on record.

Insurers are not stupid, when confronted with a flood claim they will access their own database of previous flood claims in that area and possibly in your road. They will also check the environment agency database showing the flood risks of each area. Now days they also likely to simply google the words "flood" & your area which will no doubt throw up news reports of flooding in your area.

Insurers are very good at discovering past information about claims especially for large claims such as flooding, subsidence and fire.

Are you aware of the Hunter Database? One of the things it does is compare the details you declare to your current Insurer to other applications you've made to other Insurers. Aviva are almost certainly a member...

Considering you're buying a property which has previously flooded and is I assume relatively close to a river. Have you commissioned a flood report to find out what you're letting yourself in for?

Rossim1985

dacouch wrote: »

Insurers are not stupid, when confronted with a flood claim they will access their own database of previous flood claims in that area and possibly in your road. They will also check the environment agency database showing the flood risks of each area. Now days they also likely to simply google the words "flood" & your area which will no doubt throw up news reports of flooding in your area.

I'm a property insurance broker, and you need to be telling your insurers about this.

You can get flooding reports for your property from the land registry and environment agency websites for a small fee (I think it's £9 on the environment agency). All insurers have extensive mapping systems that know the potential for not only flooding, but surface water flooding, subsidence, malicious damage and theft, as well as accumulation (how many nearby properties they insure).

The online / over the phone options for home insurance are almost completely computer driven, an rely almost entirely on the postcodes and mapping systems above with very little human involvement in deciding how bad (or good) a risk your property is.

If you are struggling to find cover at a reasonable price you will probably find a better deal by going through a local insurance broker. When you go through a broker they will have access to underwriters that retail consumers are not able to access and they may be able to find you a better deal as a result.

lkjlkjlkj

>I'm a property insurance broker, and you need to be telling your insurers about this.

Yes they're thoroughly aware that it's a high flood risk area - I'm not debating that. The home insurance is of course higher than for a 'normal' house, at £400-£800. I just want to know whether or not I can get away with saying that "to the best of my knowledge, the property itself has never flooded". And considering that the previous owner said that no claim related to flooding was ever filed, I think I might be able to?

What do you think Rossim1985? With Aviva at least, when I mentioned the (again now, AFAIK, mythical) flooding, the premium shot up to > £1500.