Hurricane Barney's fault and Churchill say it's mine!!!!

Dbuckley

On the night of 17 th November hurricane barney blew 2 of my ridge tiles from my roof and on their way down damaging 2 roof tiles and my conservatory roof. after calling my home insurance company " Churchill" they sent an assessor out on the 19 th November.
today 23 rd November they have called to say they will pay for conservatory roof but not the ridge tiles! the conservatory roof would not be damaged if the ridge tiles had not blown off with the high winds that night - and yet they won't pay out because apparently it wasn't accidental?! I have 8 yrs no claims protected and accidental cover! what is the point of protecting your property with all this insurance when they don't pay out?! never use Churchill insurance,if you do you will be sorry if you try to make a claim 😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡

If anyone can help with advising me on what to do, and how to get Churchillmto acknowledge it wasn't actually my fault, it would be greatly appreciated! I will not take this lying down - as I'm sure many of you wouldn't.

kingstreet

Is the insurer suggesting poor maintenance led to the tiles being movable by the wind?

FutureGirl

When you logged the claim with the insurer, you would have said it was the wind that took the ridge tiles off - so the claim was logged under the storm section of your policy. They are not saying that the ridge tiles coming off wasn't 'accidental', they're saying it wasn't storm damage.

They're saying that from the damage that has been caused, and the condition of the roof, that the ridge tiles were already loose due to their age or something, and the wind has just helped them to come off. The main roof isn't damaged to a one off storm, so is not covered.

As you have Accidental Damage to buildings, they're covering the conservatory roof under Accidental Damage.

It's not a case of Churchill never paying out. You have had an incident. It isn't due to one of the insured incidents noted in the policy, so they're not covering it. Simple as.

rs65

Dbuckley wrote: »

but not the ridge tiles!

What reason did they give?

Keep_pedalling

We don't have hurricanes in the UK, Barney was a just a storm and I can understand where your insurers are coming from, only loose tiles could be lifted by those winds so they needed fixing anyway, and they are not going to pay out for routine maintenance.

agrinnall

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

We don't have hurricanes in the UK, Barney was a just a storm and I can understand where your insurers are coming from, only loose tiles could be lifted by those winds so they needed fixing anyway, and they are not going to pay out for routine maintenance.

Really? So you don't think wind of 142 mph (record ground level speed, Fraserburgh, 13 February 1989 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_weather_records#Wind_speed) is enough to loosen roof tiles? Well I think you're wrong, and I think property damage can be caused by winds half that speed.

System

Seems absolutely standard and reasonable to me.

If the wind blows your tree down and it damages your house, they will pay for the house. But they won't pay for a new mature tree to be replanted.

Your water tank springs a leak, they pay for the resultant water damage but not for a new tank.

One's maintenance, the other is damage.

Keep_pedalling

agrinnall wrote: »

Really? So you don't think wind of 142 mph (record ground level speed, Fraserburgh, 13 February 1989 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_weather_records#Wind_speed) is enough to loosen roof tiles? Well I think you're wrong, and I think property damage can be caused by winds half that speed.

What have wind speeds in 1989 got to do with the OPs situation in 2015? The vast majority of ridge tiles survived storm Barney because they were properly secured these ones were not. Wind speeds were far greater in the great storm (not hurricane) of 1987 and the only people in our street who lost tiles were those that were looking somewhat shonky to start with.

Aretnap

Here is Financial Ombudsman's view on storm damage claims - it's a good place to start.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/storm-damage.html

Broadly, if the roof was in good condition until the storm and the tiles would not have fallen off in normal weather conditions, the insurer should pay. However if the roof was in poor condition and the tiles would have come down sooner rather than later in any event, they're entitled to treat it as a maintenance issue rather than storm damage, and not pay (or only pay for the accidental damage to the. It's also necessary to show that the weather conditions in your own area (not just somewhere in the country) met the definition of a storm, rather than just being a bit windier than usual. If your roof tiles fall off when it's juts "a bit windy" it's a sign that your roof's in poor condition, and not something that your insurer has to fix.

Having read that, if you still think you were poorly treated you can make a formal complaint to Churchill - the details of how to do this should be in your insurance documents. For the best chance of a good result keep the wording of your complaint polite and to the point, avoid dramatic or emotive language, and say what outcome you would be happy with. You can escalate your complaint to the Ombudsman if you're not satisfied with the response you get from the insurer.

agrinnall

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

What have wind speeds in 1989 got to do with the OPs situation in 2015? The vast majority of ridge tiles survived storm Barney because they were properly secured these ones were not. Wind speeds were far greater in the great storm (not hurricane) of 1987 and the only people in our street who lost tiles were those that were looking somewhat shonky to start with.

You seem to be suggesting that the UK never has wind speeds high enough to cause structural damage, and I think you are wrong.

Keep_pedalling

agrinnall wrote: »

You seem to be suggesting that the UK never has wind speeds high enough to cause structural damage, and I think you are wrong.

No I am not suggesting that, its just that we have not had anything of late that could rip off ridge tiles that were in good condition. If the tiles had just landed on the lawn and no damage was sustained there would be no claim.