Buildings Insurance Excess

missile

Hi,
We own the top floor flat i.e. 6th floor
The property below mine on 5th floor had a water leak which caused damage to the flat immediately below on 4th floor.
The property management company arranged redecoration of the 4th floor property via block insurance policy.
First we new of the incident was when we were charged with a portion of the insurance excess.
Is the Property Management Company correct to allocate costs to all owners? Is this normal practice?
Please note; when we had a leak from the roof into our own property, the same Property Management Company asked us to pay the insurance excess in full.
Many Thanks

Skint_yet_Again

Sorry I don't know the answer but you may find the information you are looking for or advice on the problem from here

http://www.lease-advice.org/

They are recommended on gov.uk website

https://www.gov.uk/leasehold-property/service-charges-and-other-expenses

hope that helps

missile

Many thanks for your advice.

eddddy

You need to check your lease. That should explain how expenses (like insurance excesses) are apportioned to leaseholders.

Most leases apportion these kinds of expenses across all leaseholders - but you sometimes come across very strange leases.

(It's even theoretically possible that the downstairs lease has different wording on this topic from your lease. But to be honest, that would be very unlikely.)

missile

Please be advised, the property is freehold. I had already checked the title deeds. The subject is not covered.

eddddy

OK - freehold flats are very unusual in England and Wales. (I can't comment if you're in Scotland, because it's all different.)

You mention a management company. If you're paying them money, presumably you've signed some kind of contract or covenant with them.

So you need to read that contract/covenant to see what it says about allocation of expenses.

...or if there really is no contract, I guess you just have to agree (argue) about every bit of proposed expenditure as it arises. For example:

- the roof leaked - and you personally agreed to pay the execess.
- 5th floor water leak - and you all agreed to chip-in towards the excess

HappyMJ

missile wrote: »

Please be advised, the property is freehold. I had already checked the title deeds. The subject is not covered.

That could be the problem. Downstairs is saying the roof is not their roof so they won't pay for that. You for some reason have agreed to pay the full cost of the excess but when downstairs leaked you agreed to chip in. If you argued your case then your excess for the leaky roof could have also been split across all freeholders as the roof is an essential part of the whole building as are the walls holding up everyone else's flats. Leasehold flats are much easier to understand as the freeholder is responsible for everything structural and will usually split the costs over all the leaseholders whether they like it or not.

eddddy

... just to add, if you're a freeholder, ignore the links that 'Skint yet again' provided - they only relate to leaseholders.

There is lots of legislation to protect Leaseholders from unfair freeholders and management companies.

But there is no equivalent legislation to protect freeholders. You just have to rely on contract law.

missile

Thanks for your comments.


First thing I did was check title deeds and contract with Management Company. There is nothing to cover insurance excess.


I was really hoping for some guidance on what a.n.others have been asked to do in similar circumstances.


I have checked a variety of websites and forums for guidance. I have summarised the advice, I have received to date as:


1) Any leaking pipe within the flat (i.e. after the stop !!!! within the flat) would be the flat owners responsibility to rectify and to pay for any consequential damage to other flats, the excess, and possibly any increase in annual insurance premiums.
If it's communal, it would be added to the Service charge as a
"Building repair and rectification" if it's a pipe not actually within
a flat.

2) Insurance will not normally pay for repairs, As this is usually maintenance. They will only pay for the consequential damage.

3) If the leak was to pipework within a flat, then its just normal
repairs for which the owner pays.


4) If the leak was to communal pipework, then it would be a
repair that would be incorporated into the service charge, together with any excess imposed.

missile

HappyMJ wrote: »

That could be the problem. Downstairs is saying the roof is not their roof so they won't pay for that. You for some reason have agreed to pay the full cost of the excess but when downstairs leaked you agreed to chip in. If you argued your case then your excess for the leaky roof could have also been split across all freeholders as the roof is an essential part of the whole building as are the walls holding up everyone else's flats. Leasehold flats are much easier to understand as the freeholder is responsible for everything structural and will usually split the costs over all the leaseholders whether they like it or not.

You have misread my post, fyi:
1. I did not agree to chip in.
2. I did agree to pay the insurance excess for consequential damage to my property when the roof leaked.
3. The roof is communal property. The cost of repairs to the roof was shared.

Quentin

missile wrote: »

I have checked a variety of websites and forums for guidance. I have summarised the advice, I have received to date as:


1) Any leaking pipe within the flat (i.e. after the stop !!!! within the flat) would be the flat owners responsibility to rectify and to pay for any consequential damage to other flats, the excess, and possibly any increase in annual insurance premiums......................

That advice was poor.


The only time the flat owner would be responsible for any consequential damage to other flats would be if they could be proved to have been negligent regarding the leak.


(Leaks caused by wear/tear/accident etc are unlikely to involve negligence)