Claiming off neighbours contents Insurance

lisyloo

Be careful of the advice on here as some of it is clearly wrong.
Do you have a legal advice line on your insurance?
If you can speak to a solicitor for free rather than getting dodgy advice on here then I would do that.

csgohan4

some house insurance has legal assistance included, but will only cover you if you have a >50% of winning

Brodiebobs

You need to inform the buildings insurer, their terms will no doubt state a loss whether you claimed or not, needs to be declared renewal anyway.

What caused the leak? Has it been investigated? Can the builders be held responsible-if so in the first instance your neighbour may want to persuade them to return and fix the problem to avoid a claim going against them.

If the buildings insurer thinks there is negligence they will pursue the builders insurer (if they have one!) to recover their costs, if they are successful there shouldn't be too much increase on the premium.

uk1

lisyloo wrote: »

Be careful of the advice on here as some of it is clearly wrong.
Do you have a legal advice line on your insurance?
If you can speak to a solicitor for free rather than getting dodgy advice on here then I would do that.

The OP doesn’t need ANY legal advice unless they are contemplating an end game that will involve litigation. Litigation is always the route of LAST RESORT when all other avenues have been exhausted. The OP hasn’t even started. It is only good advice when there is no other choice, and therefore imho BAD advice to suggest it whether it is free or not. Feeding a litigation route for the OP is poor advice.

The OP needs to claim from the insurance available to them and let their insurers worry about any further legal issues. That is what paying her insurance premium and shared community charge is for.

lisyloo

uk1 wrote: »

The OP doesn’t need ANY legal advice unless they are contemplating an end game that will involve litigation. Litigation is always the route of LAST RESORT when all other avenues have been exhausted. The OP hasn’t even started. It is only good advice when there is no other choice, and therefore imho BAD advice to suggest it whether it is free or not. Feeding a litigation route for the OP is poor advice.

The OP needs to claim from the insurance available to them and let their insurers worry about any further legal issues. That is what paying her insurance premium and shared community charge is for.

I completely disagree with you.
Contacting a qualified solicitor to get correct advice is absolutely not encouraging a litigation route. Actually I was expecting them to get advice AGAINST that route, but as other have made incorrect comments and I’m not qualified I felt it better left to the professionals.

They’ve had a bucket load of incorrect advice from here and that’s why I was suggesting consulting a professional who will tell them their options or not.
I totally reject that this is encouraging any particualar route but suggesting getting contradictory advice from a bunch of strangers is not always best.

Personally I’d prefer to hear it’s the wrong route from a professional than a bunch of strangers some of whom don’t know what they are talking about.

uk1

lisyloo wrote: »

I completely disagree with you.
Contacting a qualified solicitor to get correct advice is absolutely not encouraging a litigation route. Actually I was expecting them to get advice AGAINST that route, but as other have made incorrect comments and I’m not qualified I felt it better left to the professionals.

They’ve had a bucket load of incorrect advice from here and that’s why I was suggesting consulting a professional who will tell them their options or not.
I totally reject that this is encouraging any particualar route but suggesting getting contradictory advice from a bunch of strangers is not always best.

Personally I’d prefer to hear it’s the wrong route from a professional than a bunch of strangers some of whom don’t know what they are talking about.

Completely disagreeing with me doesn’t negate the fact that suggesting the OP needs legal advice in this situation is “legal advice`” and it is poor advice. And simply suggesting it does not “trump” other posts in terms of whether it is good or bad advice.

The OP has two different insurers that should cover all of their losses. It is their insurers they should be looking to and not a solicitor as a first resort and suggesting it is as a first resort is very clearly bad advice.

lisyloo

I see no harm in talking to a qualified solicitor if it is available or for free at the press of a call button.
If they say “no case, talk to your insurer” at least the OP knows that’s come from a reliable source.

I personally still see no harm in offering it as advice when it’s free and certainly better than asking strangers, so I have listened to your point of view but not changed my mind on the advice.

Let’s agree to disagree and leave it there.
The OP can decide for themselves whether to follow the suggestion or not.

uk1

lisyloo wrote: »

I see no harm in talking to a qualified solicitor if it is available or for free at the press of a call button.
If they say “no case, talk to your insurer” at least the OP knows that’s come from a reliable source.

I personally still see no harm in offering it as advice when it’s free and certainly better than asking strangers, so I have listened to your point of view but not changed my mind on the advice.

Let’s agree to disagree and leave it there.
The OP can decide for themselves whether to follow the suggestion or not.

What question do you believe the OP should ask a solicitor?

lisyloo

uk1 wrote: »

What question do you believe the OP should ask a solicitor?

Whatever they want to (but their question is in post#1).
Having a phone conversation means they can ask the qualified solicitor any questions they want for free (if they have this cover). That’s the beauty of the service, they know the advice they are getting is correct even if it is “you don’t have a case”. Being told in clear uncertain terms by professionals is of value even if it isn’t always what you want to hear.

uk1

lisyloo wrote: »

Whatever they want to (but their question is in post#1).
Having a phone conversation means they can ask the qualified solicitor any questions they want for free (if they have this cover). That’s the beauty of the service, they know the advice they are getting is correct even if it is “you don’t have a case”. Being told in clear uncertain terms by professionals is of value even if it isn’t always what you want to hear.

Advising people in general who seek legal recourse to consult a solicitor in favour of fora legal advice is always sound advice. However it is sometimes better advice to advise angry people to forget legal recourse if they have perfectly adequate insurance to call on, and let their insurers worry about who was “at fault`”.