Puchased BTL property. Insurance company highlighted an "subsidence" issue

canaldumidi

eddddy said:

NeedHelp2021 said:

With that supposition, the answer to the question "Has the seller made any building insurance claims?" should have been "YES" by the seller in TA6.

No - at this stage, you've no evidence that any claim was made. It may have been nothing more than a casual query about a crack.


This newspaper article talks about a policyholder who phoned their contents insurer twice with casual queries (but not related to subsidence) - they never made a claim - but the calls were logged on the CUE database, and their premiums shot-up.

Link: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/sep/30/insurance-query-higher-premiums


The insurance companies argue that they keep this records to prevent potential fraud and more accurately assess risk, but I'm not convinced that the way they use the info is fair and reasonable...

Does not help the OP, but as a warning to others, this is why edddy said in the very first response on page 1 "You should never contact your insurers and mention subsidence, unless you're pretty sure there is subsidence and you intend to make a claim."

My sister has got subsidence on her house. She wisely decided to investigate fully the cause and potential costs before ringing her insurers. She paid for a structural engineer's report (which she could have claimed for but did not). The report recommended 12 months monitoring, but stongly suggested nearby trees which had grown considerably.

She then paid for a tree specialist, who confirmed the diagnosis. She contacted the council who owned the trees, submitted both reports, and, eventually, the council agreed to remove the trees (whilst claimimg they had ash die-back rather than actually admit legal liability for the damage!).

The monitoring is ongoing but so far so good.

Her insurers have no idea of any of this.

If it should transpire the trees were not the problem, and/or expensive underpinning is needed, then she will contact them.

NeedHelp2021

canaldumidi said:

eddddy said:

NeedHelp2021 said:

With that supposition, the answer to the question "Has the seller made any building insurance claims?" should have been "YES" by the seller in TA6.

No - at this stage, you've no evidence that any claim was made. It may have been nothing more than a casual query about a crack.


This newspaper article talks about a policyholder who phoned their contents insurer twice with casual queries (but not related to subsidence) - they never made a claim - but the calls were logged on the CUE database, and their premiums shot-up.




The insurance companies argue that they keep this records to prevent potential fraud and more accurately assess risk, but I'm not convinced that the way they use the info is fair and reasonable...

Does not help the OP, but as a warning to others, this is why edddy said in the very first response on page 1 "You should never contact your insurers and mention subsidence, unless you're pretty sure there is subsidence and you intend to make a claim."

My sister has got subsidence on her house. She wisely decided to investigate fully the cause and potential costs before ringing her insurers. She paid for a structural engineer's report (which she could have claimed for but did not). The report recommended 12 months monitoring, but stongly suggested nearby trees which had grown considerably.

She then paid for a tree specialist, who confirmed the diagnosis. She contacted the council who owned the trees, submitted both reports, and, eventually, the council agreed to remove the trees (whilst claimimg they had tree die-back rather than actually admit legal liability for the damage!).

The monitoring is ongoing but so far so good.

Her insurers have no idea of any of this.

If it should transpire the trees were not the problem, and/or expensive underpinning is needed, then she will contact them.

Extremely wise move.
Just out of interest, (for peace of mind) if one were to commission a structural survey, will the insurance get a whiff of it? 

Slithery

NeedHelp2021 said:

canaldumidi said:

eddddy said:

NeedHelp2021 said:

With that supposition, the answer to the question "Has the seller made any building insurance claims?" should have been "YES" by the seller in TA6.

No - at this stage, you've no evidence that any claim was made. It may have been nothing more than a casual query about a crack.


This newspaper article talks about a policyholder who phoned their contents insurer twice with casual queries (but not related to subsidence) - they never made a claim - but the calls were logged on the CUE database, and their premiums shot-up.




The insurance companies argue that they keep this records to prevent potential fraud and more accurately assess risk, but I'm not convinced that the way they use the info is fair and reasonable...

Does not help the OP, but as a warning to others, this is why edddy said in the very first response on page 1 "You should never contact your insurers and mention subsidence, unless you're pretty sure there is subsidence and you intend to make a claim."

My sister has got subsidence on her house. She wisely decided to investigate fully the cause and potential costs before ringing her insurers. She paid for a structural engineer's report (which she could have claimed for but did not). The report recommended 12 months monitoring, but stongly suggested nearby trees which had grown considerably.

She then paid for a tree specialist, who confirmed the diagnosis. She contacted the council who owned the trees, submitted both reports, and, eventually, the council agreed to remove the trees (whilst claimimg they had tree die-back rather than actually admit legal liability for the damage!).

The monitoring is ongoing but so far so good.

Her insurers have no idea of any of this.

If it should transpire the trees were not the problem, and/or expensive underpinning is needed, then she will contact them.

Extremely wise move.
Just out of interest, (for peace of mind) if one were to commission a structural survey, will the insurance get a whiff of it? 

Only if you tell them about it.

canaldumidi

NeedHelp2021 said:

canaldumidi said:

eddddy said:

NeedHelp2021 said:

With that supposition, the answer to the question "Has the seller made any building insurance claims?" should have been "YES" by the seller in TA6.

No - at this stage, you've no evidence that any claim was made. It may have been nothing more than a casual query about a crack.


This newspaper article talks about a policyholder who phoned their contents insurer twice with casual queries (but not related to subsidence) - they never made a claim - but the calls were logged on the CUE database, and their premiums shot-up.




The insurance companies argue that they keep this records to prevent potential fraud and more accurately assess risk, but I'm not convinced that the way they use the info is fair and reasonable...

Does not help the OP, but as a warning to others, this is why edddy said in the very first response on page 1 "You should never contact your insurers and mention subsidence, unless you're pretty sure there is subsidence and you intend to make a claim."

My sister has got subsidence on her house. She wisely decided to investigate fully the cause and potential costs before ringing her insurers. She paid for a structural engineer's report (which she could have claimed for but did not). The report recommended 12 months monitoring, but stongly suggested nearby trees which had grown considerably.

She then paid for a tree specialist, who confirmed the diagnosis. She contacted the council who owned the trees, submitted both reports, and, eventually, the council agreed to remove the trees (whilst claimimg they had tree die-back rather than actually admit legal liability for the damage!).

The monitoring is ongoing but so far so good.

Her insurers have no idea of any of this.

If it should transpire the trees were not the problem, and/or expensive underpinning is needed, then she will contact them.

Extremely wise move.
Just out of interest, (for peace of mind) if one were to commission a structural survey, will the insurance get a whiff of it? 

I don't see how. The SE will send the report to his (private) client. The client has the choice of sending it to his insurer, or not.

In my sister's case, the local authority has a copy, but a) does not know who her insurer is, and b) has no reason to share it (and probably no right to).

Crashy_Time

Insurer might cancel or hike the price if they found out?