Third subsidence claim

instantink

Annemos said:

In my policy, legal expenses related to Subsidence were especially excluded from the legal cover in the insurance policy. 

I agree with dacouch. I think you would need to get a Structural survey done, but the problem might be finding one that is expert in Subsidence. A Structural Engineer or Civil Engineer might be the best one to do this for you. 

The Financial Ombudsman's cases say that Subsidence repairs must be Lasting and Effective. So if this has happened again due to the same cause as before, then one could hardly say the former repairs had been lasting and effective? So the Insurance Company should presumably do more investigations again to see what the ongoing problem is. (But it would be good to have a second opinion from one's own expert, too.)

Are there other trees? Is the soil not rehydrating? Did they monitor the cracks for a sufficiently long period last time, to make sure the building had stabilised? 

I understand that these days they do not go straight into an underpinning, because they worry about a weakness between the part of the building that was underpinned and the part that was not underpinned. So I think the Insurance Companies are allowed to try less invasive repair measures first. But they would need to take another look at it, if there is still a problem. It is really stressful (I know!) but this seems to be the way it operates these days. I have always preferred that they do not underpin straight away, as underpinning can add to insurance difficulties. 

When you say "stronger repair methods" were used, do you mean for example the use of the metal helifix bars? If so, were they installed correctly do you know....for example to crack-stitch? Here are the instructions if you need to try and check into this. If bars were used, do the bars map correctly onto the original cracks? 
https://www.helifix.co.uk/uploads/pdfs/Helifix-Crack-Stitching.pdf

There was a local authroity tree removed, (after the second time).

They used helifix the first time, and a beefed up version the second, however the structure that it was tied into was 'weak' and I told them so, but they said it would be alright, guess who was right 😐

Monitoring was extensive and for at least a year each time, may have been more after the tree removal.

I will look at getting an independent survey done but wanted to gather all advice and opinions first.

Sandtree

paddyandstumpy said:

Diminution of value is normally excluded following subsidence related claims. 

I agree the insurer should re-open the previous claim rather than start a new one, but you should not get compensated for loss of value. 

Diminution of value will not be covered as a result of the insured event as this is covered by the terms and conditions of the policy.

The OP is effectively now not claiming under the terms of the policy for an insured event but for breach of contract/ duty of care for having not made appropriate repairs in the first/second instance. As such it may well be possible to claim for diminution despite the policy terms if they can be adequately proven (both liability and quantum).

Annemos

Helifix bars are a very sore point with me at the moment!
"Is it   necessary/preferable/sensible    to use Approved Installers or   is it not!"  (I am being sarcastic.)
============================================================
Anyway, I always find this website really useful......
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/data-insight/ombudsman-decisions
A search on...... Subsidence Loss in Value. 

I don't know if you want to take a look at some of these cases to see if any of them are of help? 
I just did a quick search and this is the type of Ombudsman case that pops up........ there are 127 cases under this search.
They seem to pay for loss in value under certain circumstances, but only after a property is sold and a loss realised. 

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/files/162034/DRN6491607.pdf
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/files/68836/DRN2445737.pdf
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/files/59014/DRN1971631.pdf
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/files/149003/DRN5893148.pdf

instantink

With apologies for resurrecting an old thread, but this is ongoing and I have recently discovered that the insurance company 'won' several thousand pounds compensation from the local authority because of the tree, presumably to compensate them for their outlay in repaing my subsidence.

What is everyones opinon of this, I'm f***ing furious that my premiums are nearly 300% more than my non-subsidence neighbours, my subsidence is still there, and my insurance company are being compensated for their inconvenience, I mean c'mon, really, they've had nearly £6000 in extra premiums from me since the last fix and now they have compensation.

I have a house that will be worth less when I sell it and they continue to rake in money, this cannot be right!!!!

Annemos

instantink. I am so sorry to read this. 

I also have problems, so I understand how you feel. What happens to us can be hard to stomach. 

Please carry on trying to get what is right for your property. We start off not knowing anything, but then sometimes we have a chink of light and a breakthrough......

The onus is on us the Homeowner to come up with the evidence, if we believe the Insurance Company (and their Engineer who is paid by them) is not doing the right thing by our property. 

In fact, this is another thing that always bothers me, because we have to suffer these exra costs up front and we are not sure we will ever get them back. But if we can prove that what they have done was not sufficient, then we should be able to claim those costs back for the advice. 

So I still think you need a proper Structural Engineering report. This would be able to assess if underpinning is required. Or if  that method to inject the voids under the property could be used etc etc. 

Or if it is not even Subsidence now, but something else. (Could the 2nd repairs have been faulty even?) 

One breakthrough that I had........

I found out that my own Tree Inspector is one of the very best in the County. Years and years of experience on Subsidence by trees. AND he is often called in by Structural Engineering Companies to assist on their clients. 

THAT is how I found my Structural Engineer. He was recommended to me by the Tree Inspector. And the Engineer had dealt with Subsidence claims. 

Once you have that evidence for the building itself, then you can go to the Ombudsman if necessary on all the issues you are unhappy about.

Good luck instantink. 

(I am only a regular homeowner like you. I am not an expert in Insurance, Buildings etc)