AXA Home insurance Subsidence claim policy wording. Help!

Atomic_Suplex

I called AXA home insurance about cracks in my home inside and out back in 2014. 
They said it wasn't actual subsidence just a leaky drain that was then fixed. 

The final report said "minor subsidence due to a crack in a drain that resettled" 

When I renewed my policy and asked 'do I say I had subsidence in the last 10 years' they said no. As it wasn't really subsidence. 

I have just discovered more cracks, far more worrying cracks, but I am scared that if I phone AXA saying I might have subsidence  they will say "you should have ticked the box to say you had subsidence in the last 10 years" because the report technically said 'Minor Subsidence' . . . 

I don't have a paper trail, I was just told by AXA on the phone that they didn't think it counted as actual subsidence. 

eddddy

Perhaps a starting point would be to instruct a structural engineer to come and have a look, and give you an opinion on the cause of the cracks.

And maybe discuss options for moving forward with the structural engineer.

For example, repairing a leaking drain and re-plastering might not be too expensive (if that's all that's needed) - and the structural engineer might then give you a certificate of structural adequacy.

You can then maybe find another insurer who will insure you, as you have a certificate of structural adequacy - and you can cancel your AXA policy.


Whatever way you move forward, it's probably best not to contact your insurance company unless/until you know it really is subsidence, and you have a plan.

Atomic_Suplex

eddddy said:

For example, repairing a leaking drain and re-plastering might not be too expensive (if that's all that's needed) - and the structural engineer might then give you a certificate of structural adequacy.

Thanks for the reply. 

I don't think it is anything at all to do with a leaky drain. That's just what AXA said back in 2014. 

I showed them all the cracks all around the house, but they only seemed concerned with the back of the house and decided it was a hairline crack to the drain that had caused minor subsidence. 

They redecorated but the cracks returned, then they redecorated again and the cracks returned again. This time they said it was just normal house movement and they had finished with it. 

Those cracks at the back, to be fair, have not really gotten any worse for six years. 

My problem is a new crack showing at the side of the house outside and in. I am worried these really are REAL substance (they are certainly nothing to do with minor drain leakage at the back from 2014). 

I guess what I am worried about is that if I call AXA to check it out, they will say the policy is null because I ticked the 'no substance in the last 10 years box' . . . This was what they guy from AXA told me to do back in 2014, but I have no paper trail. Technically   the report says 'minor subsidence due to leak that has since settled'. 
Guy from AXA said it didn't count as subsidence, but it must have done because I paid the £1000 subsidence excess. 

eddddy

Atomic_Suplex said:

I guess what I am worried about is that if I call AXA to check it out, they will say the policy is null because I ticked the 'no substance in the last 10 years box' . . . 

Yep. That's why I suggested that you don't call AXA at this stage, and you call a structural engineer instead.

And you don't call AXA until you have advice from the structural engineer and you have worked out a plan for moving forward.

diystarter7

As above
Get a report.
Then if it goes against you sit and think about what you are to say.

Being honest is the best policy.
Be open and honest you did not note, was not aware, ignorant, etc but be polite and honest.
You may be pleasantly surprised but if not, you will have a proper cover and no black marks against your name.

Being honest often pays but not always but it is not worth holding back something you may be aware of.

However, you did pay the 1k and if you genuinely did forget, tell them and when they say you own them x amount because of what happened, don't argue, pay up.

Often they ask, "any history of ......"


There would be a note on your file hopefully from 2014. EG, I rang the ins outfit re my car, winter tyres, no extra charge but I asked them to make a note on the sytem as i was on the phone and for good measure I took their name, city they worked in and time and date of call - sure I lost that note with the name soon after but I'm pretty sure the guy when i asked for name etc made the note

Atomic_Suplex

diystarter7 said:

However, you did pay the 1k and if you genuinely did forget, tell them and when they say you own them x amount because of what happened, don't argue, pay up.

Often they ask, "any history of ......"

I didn't forget that I paid £1000 at all. I just wish I had thought of that. If they are saying it's not 'actual substance and heave etc' then why did I pay a £1000 excess on a claim? 

When my policy renewal first came up (after the first claim in 2014 ) and I saw the question "Have you have heave or subsidence in the last 10 years" . . . I called the guy from AXA for clarification, and he seemed to think it didn't count as actual subsidence that needed to be noted on my property. I felt satisfied at the time, but now feel I should have been more pushy about getting it all in writing and getting absolute clarification.

I don't think this was an email conversation, or even a call to AXA, I think it was an unrecorded call to his unit or even his mobile. It's all so long ago now, I'm just not sure. . . but I do know I fretted about it back then. 

The claim has  just rolled over each year. The only adjustment I made since was to the section 'have you made a claim in the last five years'. 

TSx

If you'd moved your policy around, or were going through a broker you'd have more of an issue - if you made a claim with AXA and have subsequently renewed every year since, AXA ought to be aware of the circumstances as they dealt with the claim. I suspect the FOS (the ombudsman responsible for insurance companies) would see it the same way.

Atomic_Suplex

TSx said:

If you'd moved your policy around, or were going through a broker you'd have more of an issue - if you made a claim with AXA and have subsequently renewed every year since, AXA ought to be aware of the circumstances as they dealt with the claim. I suspect the FOS (the ombudsman responsible for insurance companies) would see it the same way.

Are the FOS someone I could contact in advance just to see what they say, or would I have to make a claim first? 

I also wonder what would happen if I renewed (I think it comes up again in only a couple of months) and changed it so say 'I did' have subsidence in the last 10 years. 

I think one of the problems might have been that I did try and do this in the very first place back in 2014, but the on-line form did not let me fill that out correctly an that is why I contacted the them to get clarification. 

I must have been satisfied at the time, but now, years on, I am not so sure and wonder if I have been done a kind of catch 22 number on. 

Sandtree

FOS call centre cannot give advise on how something should be settled etc, they can only advise on the complaints process. They may offer to raise the complaint to the insurer for you but be aware that this is a stock template letter which the call centre operator can add up to 4 lines of text to to explain your issue... having seen many of these some of them are very poorly worded and clearly very compressed given the limited space they have. 

Atomic_Suplex

I see. 

I am wondering if the 'any heave or subsidence in the last 10 years' might be to stop people new to the house or moving to AXA pulling a fast one, rather than me 'assuming the worst' and thinking it's there to trap me. 

Might I presume that they would be, and should be (without being told) well aware of issues that they have felt with themselves? 

Annemos

Good morning A_S

Having had a Subsidence case, I regularly go through the Ombudsman decisions for any new cases. 

I saw one today that reminded me of your question. 

I thought you might be interested to read it. 

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-3459555.pdf