Advice on home insurance claim - burst pipe

Dangermouse99

Hi, I was hoping somebody could maybe advise on something. We've never made a home insurance claim before but a few weeks ago a pipe burst in our bathroom whilst we were out shopping. This has caused significant damage, mainly to the kitchen beneath it.

It's possible that the cause of the pipe bursting was that a new boiler was installed a few weeks prior (gas certified with 10 year warranty). The new boiler is a combi, so different to the old system and although it worked fine for a few weeks, maybe the additional pressure has played a role. The pipe itself was standard and it's type is still used and installed in houses today.

I've no idea whether or not the boiler info matters in a claim or whether it should even be mentioned. As far as I can see in the policy documents, we should be covered. Can anybody please advise or have any useful information on this? This is all new to me and scary given the damage done and repairs work that needs to be carried out.

Mark_d

I would call your home insurance company and explain that you've had a burst pipe.  I would stick to the facts, answer their questions, and not speculate about possibly causes for the pipe bursting.

It doesn't sound as if there was any negligence on your part so I can't see any reason why your home insurance would make any fuss.

Dangermouse99

Thanks. Would anybody recommend the insurer providing the suppliers to carry out the works or is it best to find somebody you know to do the job? I know little about all this but I think if they provide the company, they initially send a contractor to come out with the assessor. Between them, they decide what is damaged and needs replacing and if we're covered, etc? Would it be a negative if they send out this person as they may underestimate the damage?

Annemos

I am not an expert in this, Dm99. 

But my thoughts are....  what does it say in your own policy about how they handle claims? 


For example, mine says this......

We will pay for the cost of work carried out in repairing or replacing the damaged parts of your buildings and agreed fees and related costs.

The amount we will pay where repairs are carried out will not exceed the lesser of:

• The cost of the work had it been completed by our nominated contractor or

• The cost of the work based upon the most competitive estimate or tender from your nominated contractors.



I have seen discussions through the FOS Ombudsman, where the home-owner's quotes were all higher than the amount offered by the Claims Handler. And then an analysis had to be done comparing :    what was included in the Claim Handler's offer       versus       what the homeowner's quotes included.  And was any excess cost in the homeowners' quotes due to them saying that additional work should be done and was that extra actually justifiable?

(From memory.... say for example if the homeowners' quotes said that a wall should have some preliminary preparation work done to make it fit for the repairs, but the Claims Handler's said that step was not necessary. The Ombudsman would look at the justification for that extra step. Or if an item was completely left out of the Claim Handler's Scope of Works etc etc.) 


I think it also has to be said:   I have always thought.... that if the Claim Handler's chaps do the repair work, then the Insurance Company is liable if any of it goes wrong or it is done poorly. But if your own Repair chaps do it, then you take on that liability yourself for any work they do. Perhaps someone might confirm that for us?  

Trust in the contractors is such a difficult thing... whether done by yours or by the Insurance Company's. 

(Another one from memory... the Claim Handler did not have a Contractor available to do the work. So the homeowner had to use their own Contractor whose rates were higher. It was ruled that the Insurance Company must accept the higher rates of the Homeowner's contractor.) 

Dangermouse99

@Annemos Thank you so much for the considered reply.

Lots of useful information there, this part especially...
"if the Claim Handler's chaps do the repair work, then the Insurance Company is liable if any of it goes wrong or it is done poorly. But if your own Repair chaps do it, then you take on that liability yourself for any work they do".

You're quite right and that's the route I'm expecting to take provided everything goes smoothly. The one slight problem of using their contractors is potential backlog in jobs causing a delay. I'm hoping this won't be a problem.

I may well revisit this thread once things are progressing in case it helps anybody else who is in the same position.

Dangermouse99

I just wanted to update this in case it helps anybody in future - so the claims process has been pretty good so far. The insurers will be paying out and there is only the excess to pay (which is around £750) - we're pretty happy with that. There wasn't a great deal of questions about the pipe, I guess it was obvious to them what had happened and with the absence of any historical claims from us.

As Annemos suggested above, we've gone with the insurer's suppliers for the works. The communications and everything has been pretty excellent thus far, quite impressed.