I need help, my buildings insurance company is trying to decline my flood claim

Sabbir

I was away in Bangladesh for 76 days during which my house flooded. I found out from a neighbour when I was abroad and called my insurance company who said I was away for more than 60 days. I said to consider my claim as I am vulnerable person with a kidney transplant , so they sent me a letter saying “in order to consider your claim we need to backdate your property from the 14th October and there is an additional premium to pay of £59. I paid this. Then the loss adjuster came and asked to see my plumbing report and ask my plumber if there was evidence the leak was due to very cold weather. My plumber was unable to give a definite answer . Then the loss adjuster called me up and said the claim is declined because I was away for more than 60 days. So I then said I paid an extra £59 to backdate my cover.

Then after speaking to the insurance company the loss adjuster said the underwriting department did not communicate with the claims department which was decling the claim. He said he would get back to me with a decision soon.

If the loss adjuster tries to decline the claim what should I do? Can he still decline the claim?

housebuyer143

Why did they house flood? That's going to be the important piece of info here. 
If the pipe burst and you left it over winter without heating or draining the system down you can expect them to decline it.

What was the extra payment for? The house being empty? I'm not sure I understand this bit. Even if you had empty home insurance it's normally still a requirement to drain down the system if you are not there for long periods. 

As above, it comes down to what they deem the cause of the leak as to whether they will pay out. What does your policy say to do if it's left empty for more than 60 days?

GDB2222

How much, very roughly, are you claiming? Hundreds of pounds, thousands, tens of thousands? 

ThisIsWeird

Hi Sabbir.

From what you describe, your plumber was not able to discern the cause of the leak.

The loss adjuster is seemingly accepting of the lack of conclusion in your plumber's report; they are at least not challenging it, and have yet to employ a second opinion.  

Meanwhile, your insurance co has very generously allowed you to back-date the start of an updated policy that allows for the house to be left empty for longer? That is great news, and very kind of them, and I guess it's down to your personal circumstances.

So, it would just appear as tho' there's been a lack of comms here, that's all, and the loss-adjuster is acting on the previous policy details. If you have proof of the new, back-dated policy, and the loss adjuster's decision was based on the original (but now-corrected) old version, then you hopefully have nothing to worry about. Let them sort it. But get your paperwork in order in case you need to escalate this to the Ombudsman. Hopefully you won't.

Do you have Legal Protection added to your policy? These are independent legal companies, so should - amusingly enough - act for you even against the insurance company if needed

Hopefully they'll simply rectify their error, tho'.

Good luck. (A bit careless, tho'! )

propertyrental

Sabbir said:

.......my insurance company who said I was away for more than 60 days.

 they sent me a letter saying “in order to consider your claim we need to backdate your property from the 14th October and there is an additional premium to pay of £59. 

I don't understand. What was 'back-dated'? The start date of the policy? In that case you would still be in breach of the 60 day 'unoccupied property' clause.

Or did they 'back date' the date when you left the property unoccupied ie left the country? Oh! But that would have increased the period the property was unoccupied....

Sabbir

Thank you everyone for your comments , all very helpful. To answer the questions. They backdated the policy for me being over 60 days away, and so I paid an extra £59. The house did not burst due to a burst pipe but due to ball on the water tank not functioning to stop water flowing, that is what the plumber told me , and he replaced the ball on the tank and it is now all ok . The policy says if I am away for more that 60 days then it is invalid. I did not drain the system when I left the property. I think I have legal protection so I can explore that option or the onbudsman.

Clive_Woody

Does this additional payment allow you to be away from your home for more than 60 days?

I would be surprised if they allowed this claim by letting you pay a small additional premium when this may cost them thousands.

km1500

If the ball on the water tank failed, the excess water would escape via the overflow pipe. 

If this pipe was not functioning your claim may be denied because of lack of maintenance - irrespective of the 60 day limit.

ThisIsWeird

I'm assuming that's what Sabbir means, Clive Woody; the insurance co - remarkably - were prepared to redo the policy with that additional premium to cover the increased policy cost for a more than 60 absence. As you say, that would be extremely generous of them, but they may have been sympathetic to the OP's medical condition?

Yes, fair point, km1500, but an incorrect installation would hardly be the OP's fault. How's your overflow? When did you last check it?

That would be unfair to disallow - unless, perhaps, it was a recent installation, and the plumber track-downable.

theartfullodger

Employ an independent claims adjuster.

Sabbir

Thank you, it is good question, I did not check if ther is an overflow, I have never checked the overflow as my father died 1 year ago and it was his reponsibility before he dies , I have inherited the property and have not checked the installation. Thanks for the advice on an independent loss adjuster. I think the underwriting dept were genereous in allowing me to pay a small excess premium after the flooding , but the claims dept and loss adjuster seem to be eager to dismiss it on being away for more than 60 days or damge being not due to freezing weeather