Public Liability insurance Claim

bill_on_line

Hello Group

With a bit of persistance I have been able to track down the Public Liability/PL Insurer for the dissolved company that did work at my home.

1, The PL insurer said they also provided Employer liability/EL insururance but nothing appears on a search of the ELTO database for EL?

Any way the dissolved company did the installation in March 2014.
They only had PL insurance with this provider between January 2015 and January 2016.

2, I discovered i had a problem/damage to my property in January 2016. I have written proof even though i did not known who the PL insurer was at this time for the date of discovery. The PL insurer says I am covered with regards to the dates as i only discovered the problem/damage when cover was in place.
Even though the damage to my roof occured in 2014 when the installation occured.
Does this seem right that a claim is based on the date of my discovery rather than the date the damage happened to my property?

3, Any way the PL insurer is sending a surveyor round Tuesday. The dissolved company director is denying that they caused any damage. Its a long story, but the director has told so many lies in the past and he lost previously in an arbitration claim. I fortunately had photographic evidence before his company carried out any work but i expect he may still deny causing the damage possibly thwating my PL insurance claim.

4, The PL insuerat at first said i had prove the damage was due to the installers work. However with a bit of persistance and photographic evidence another insurers report i believe they are now believing my account (which is honestly true) rather than their insured denial, especialy as they have arranged the surveyer to visit. I have offered to provide the PL insurer with the arbitration decision and other correspondence that shows the installer lied on many occasions. And i had a witness on one visit they made.
Not sure why the director is denying my claim as the company is nolonger trading and he is currently not a director of any other company? Would it affect his ability/cost to take out PL insurance in the future?

5, If the PL insurer starts again saying i need to prove the damage was done by their insured. I have already provided so much evidence. And can provide numerous independent reports of the lies told what more do the PL insuer need?

6, Worst case senario the claim is not big probably £500 to £600 should i just issue a small claim. The PL insurer a big insurance company i am guessing would just pay up as they do not want the expense and to get me off their back.

Thank you for reading
And for the previous help provided on the topic of PL insurance

Bill



5,

rs65

1. Irrelevant
2. PL is 'claims occurring' so its the policy in force when the damage occurred that is relevant. So probably not that insurer if the damage occurred in 2014 and their cover started in Jan 2015.
3. Irrelevant. Telling lies doesn't mean they caused damage.
4. Quite normal to have to prove fault. It is liability insurance.
5. see 3 and 4
6. If they didn't cover the dates, I don't think they will pay.

dacouch

To add to RS's excellent post, IF the insurer does actually cover the claim the trader is liable for the excess. This is typically £250 or £300 but can be significantly higher for a roofer.

bill_on_line

Hello dacouch
The installer was a small Ltd company which is now dissolved.
So how would the insurer claim the excess off a dissolved company, i would think this is not that practicale as there is no reciever etc according to companies house.
Would they expect me to pay the excess of any claim if they agree to pay?

regards
bill

dacouch

The Insurer is only liable to pay the amount above the excess

bill_on_line

Hello Dacouch
you say the "The Insurer is only liable to pay the amount above the excess".
However i not agree to the original policy excess it was the installer who is now dissolved.

bill_on_line

Thanks rs65 you say
"2. PL is 'claims occurring' so its the policy in force when the damage occurred that is relevant. So probably not that insurer if the damage occurred in 2014 and their cover started in Jan 2015."

I have put this question to the insurer on many occasions as i have said do not want waste my time if they were no cover for this senario, as usual i got no response A representative from the PL insurer eventualy phoned and said the date was not a problem. It is apparantly the date i discovered the problem not the date the install was done/the damage occured to my property (as i was unaware in 2014 i have proof of this delay). This really surprised me for similar reasons as you state clearly. They seem knowledgeable and said it is now a matter of to prove fault. Will send a surveyer and contact the installed again. I am still confused about this and would like it in writing.


4. "Quite normal to have to prove fault. It is liability insurance."
What would be acceptable proof
1, I have a before roof damaged and after roof damaged photo showing clearly the damage caused by the installers work.
2, I have an independant assesment made for another insurer whoes engineer says it was due to the work carried out by the installer.
3, A witness who was present when the installer came to inspect/repair
4, Also many email messages to the trade bodies complaining about the installer and the roof problem. Once i was aware to get the installer out to repair.
5, I was there when they carried out the damage, but could not see the damage the roof was made watertight as that part of the roof is not visable from the ground.

Not sure what more could be reasonably provided as proof?

Dangermac

I applaud your hard work to track down the insurer.


This matter is not straight forward by any stretch, and I think that there are a number of hurdles that you will need to cross:

• You will need to prove 'damage' - as opposed to simply defective workmanship. Public Liability policies will cover damage/injury

• Regardless of what you have been told, almost all Public Liability policies provide cover for damage or injury which occurs during the period of insurance

• You will need to prove the damage which has been caused. If the policyholder denies liability for the damage caused, you will need to prove (on the balance of probabilities) that the contractor caused the damage.

• There is some legislation which gives 3rd parties some rights against insurers, but I do not know how this works in practice. Under normal circumstances, you would claim against the contractor and the contractor would use his/her Public Liability policy to protect him/her.

• The insurer is likely to settle the claim less the policy excess. You may need to pursue the dissolved company for the excess. It is possible to resurrect a dissolved company for the purposes of responding to/defending a claim., but this is exceptionally rare, and probably for large/high profile claims.

• I'm not sure if you will be able to sue the insurer. Will depend on the legislation in this regard. I don't have sufficient information on this to be sure.

Good luck with your endeavours. Please let us know how you get on


DM

bill_on_line

On 1 August 2016 the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 (the 2010 Act) will come into force. The 2010 Act will be swiftly followed by the Insurance Act 2015, which will come into force on 12 August 2016.

Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers Act) 2010

The 2010 Act will be relevant for anyone dealing with an insolvent party in litigation and improves the position for third parties from the current Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930 (the 1930 Act).
A detailed explanation is set out in our previous e-alert which can be found here. However, by way of summary:

• Both the 1930 Act and the 2010 Act allow third parties to bring proceedings directly against insurers when the insured is liable to indemnify the third party but has become insolvent.
• However, the 2010 Act introduces some significant changes. The most important of these are as follows:
  • Both the 2010 Act and the 1930 Act operate by transferring the insured's rights under the insurance policy to a third party. However, the 2010 Act does not require the third party to establish the liability of the insured before pursuing the insurer directly. This is a contrast to the 1930 Act under which establishing the liability of the insured could be time consuming and expensive.
  • The usual position under English law is that there is no requirement for a party to provide details of its insurance to a third party or litigation opponent. Under the 2010 Act, a third party who "reasonably believes" an insolvent insured has incurred a liability to him may, by notice in writing, request the insured (or another party, such as a broker) provides information about the insurance. This includes whether there is insurance that covers (or may reasonably be thought to cover) the supposed liability and further specific details concerning it.
  • The general principle that any defences available to the insurer as against its insured can be raised against the third party remains. However, certain technical defences are removed by the 2010 Act and the third party is allowed to fulfil certain requirements of the insurance as if it was the insured.

dacouch

You have no contractual rights against the insurers, their contract is with the trader. The contract between the Insurer and trader will all for an excess and the amount of the excess is all the Insurer will pay.

If it is two incidents if damage, the Insurer can apply the excess twice

bill_on_line

Hello Insurance Group
The Public Liability Insurer has offered me £900 for full and final settlement of my claim, for the damage to the roof of my home.

This came as a bit of a suprise after many months of persistantly persuing various insurance companies.

As far as i known the PL insurance started in Jan 2015 (and ran for only 12 months) and i disscovered the damage in Jan 2016. However the contractor (which is a dissolved company) carried out the work which caused the damage to my home in March 2014.

At the momenti i do not known much about the contractors PL policy eg if the policy is written on a claims occuring, claims made basis or if there is a retroactive date and any excess that may apply as disscused previously in this thread.

As group experts have said PL is normaly written on a claims occuring basis, maybe fortunately for me a retroactive date applies to the contractors PL insurance, covering work in previous years by this contractor?

regards
Bill