Landscaper has damaged neighbours shed

IvanOpinion

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.

If I was that neighbour, I would not give you any insurance details and direct you to the contractor. What’s your next move?

If I did have 'that sort' of neighbour then I would not waste my valuable time on them. I would simply refer it to my insurance, providing full details of the neighbour, and instructing my insurance to seek redress directly from them, or their insurance. That is why I have legal cover bundled with my household insurance, I have already paid for it so I may as well use it.

Fortunately, in this case, it is obvious that the neighbour 'responsible' for the damage is a good neighbour and is looking to take ownership of the situation. If, as the OP suggests, the contractor is reputable, then they should sort out the damage they did without causing a dispute between neighbours.

And your neighbour would direct your insurer to the contractor. What’s your next move?

The neighbour bares no responsibility here, unless they do something daft to make it so.

You are mistaken. But that is irrelevant.
My insurance company would have 'made me whole', and the contractor and my neighbours insurance companies may be fighting it out as to who is going to reimburse my insurance company - I really don't care which one does it.
So as far as I am concerned, game, set, match. Not my problem, no need to waste any more of my valuable time on irresponsible neighbours/contractors.

You are mistaken, in as much as your insurance company would have to deal with the contractors insurance, not your neighbours. And you have a claim on your record. Best you sort it directly with the contractor.

How would your insurer even know who your neighbours insurers are, if they have one? Is there a central register? What if your neighbour chooses to self insure (eg, has no mortgage and no insurance)?

Of course first resort is with neighbour and contractor, but in the scenario you created, we ascertained that they were being uncooperative. You are totally missing the point. Once handed to the insurers it becomes their problem not mine, that is what I am paying for, I can get on with more important things. I am only interested in getting my problem resolved and really do not care who pays (as long as it is not me) or how much it costs them.

I am not the sort that pays for insurance and is then too scared to claim on it for fear of having a small rise in cost. People generally overestimate the impact a claim may have on their insurance. If I need to use insurance I will, otherwise what is the sense in paying for it. If I want a bit of paper to decorate the walls with I will go to B&Q and buy wall paper not pay for insurance.

I have actually been through this, not with my own house, but with my mum's when work being done at her neighbours caused the slab on which her oil tank was sitting to subside. I had no emotional ties to the neighbour (nice chap but in denial), had no interest in dealing with his contractor and couldn't be bothered wasting my time on it so I just handed it over to my mum's insurance (I had PoA). Their legal team sorted it out (although it took about 3 months), and what happened between the neighbour and contractor is none of my business (but I know that the (quite significant) costs were recouped from one of them or their insurers, no idea which and I really don't care). My mum's insurance went up by less than £4 the following year.

sheramber

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.

If I was that neighbour, I would not give you any insurance details and direct you to the contractor. What’s your next move?

If I did have 'that sort' of neighbour then I would not waste my valuable time on them. I would simply refer it to my insurance, providing full details of the neighbour, and instructing my insurance to seek redress directly from them, or their insurance. That is why I have legal cover bundled with my household insurance, I have already paid for it so I may as well use it.

Fortunately, in this case, it is obvious that the neighbour 'responsible' for the damage is a good neighbour and is looking to take ownership of the situation. If, as the OP suggests, the contractor is reputable, then they should sort out the damage they did without causing a dispute between neighbours.

And your neighbour would direct your insurer to the contractor. What’s your next move?

The neighbour bares no responsibility here, unless they do something daft to make it so.

You are mistaken. But that is irrelevant.
My insurance company would have 'made me whole', and the contractor and my neighbours insurance companies may be fighting it out as to who is going to reimburse my insurance company - I really don't care which one does it.
So as far as I am concerned, game, set, match. Not my problem, no need to waste any more of my valuable time on irresponsible neighbours/contractors.

You are mistaken, in as much as your insurance company would have to deal with the contractors insurance, not your neighbours. And you have a claim on your record. Best you sort it directly with the contractor.

How would your insurer even know who your neighbours insurers are, if they have one? Is there a central register? What if your neighbour chooses to self insure (eg, has no mortgage and no insurance)?

Of course first resort is with neighbour and contractor, but in the scenario you created, we ascertained that they were being uncooperative. You are totally missing the point. Once handed to the insurers it becomes their problem not mine, that is what I am paying for, I can get on with more important things. I am only interested in getting my problem resolved and really do not care who pays (as long as it is not me) or how much it costs them.

I am not the sort that pays for insurance and is then too scared to claim on it for fear of having a small rise in cost. People generally overestimate the impact a claim may have on their insurance. If I need to use insurance I will, otherwise what is the sense in paying for it. If I want a bit of paper to decorate the walls with I will go to B&Q and buy wall paper not pay for insurance.

I have actually been through this, not with my own house, but with my mum's when work being done at her neighbours caused the slab on which her oil tank was sitting to subside. I had no emotional ties to the neighbour (nice chap but in denial), had no interest in dealing with his contractor and couldn't be bothered wasting my time on it so I just handed it over to my mum's insurance (I had PoA). Their legal team sorted it out (although it took about 3 months), and what happened between the neighbour and contractor is none of my business (but I know that the (quite significant) costs were recouped from one of them or their insurers, no idea which and I really don't care). My mum's insurance went up by less than £4 the following year.

So you have gone from dealing with the neighbour, to dealing with your neighbour’s insurance, to handing it to your insurance and letting them deal with.

You got there in the end.

JGB1955

I imagine an old, decrepit shed is probably worth less than £100.  Pointless the neighbours moaning about it.  They can only ask for the value of the 'old, decrepit, shed'.

MeteredOut

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.

If I was that neighbour, I would not give you any insurance details and direct you to the contractor. What’s your next move?

If I did have 'that sort' of neighbour then I would not waste my valuable time on them. I would simply refer it to my insurance, providing full details of the neighbour, and instructing my insurance to seek redress directly from them, or their insurance. That is why I have legal cover bundled with my household insurance, I have already paid for it so I may as well use it.

Fortunately, in this case, it is obvious that the neighbour 'responsible' for the damage is a good neighbour and is looking to take ownership of the situation. If, as the OP suggests, the contractor is reputable, then they should sort out the damage they did without causing a dispute between neighbours.

And your neighbour would direct your insurer to the contractor. What’s your next move?

The neighbour bares no responsibility here, unless they do something daft to make it so.

You are mistaken. But that is irrelevant.
My insurance company would have 'made me whole', and the contractor and my neighbours insurance companies may be fighting it out as to who is going to reimburse my insurance company - I really don't care which one does it.
So as far as I am concerned, game, set, match. Not my problem, no need to waste any more of my valuable time on irresponsible neighbours/contractors.

You are mistaken, in as much as your insurance company would have to deal with the contractors insurance, not your neighbours. And you have a claim on your record. Best you sort it directly with the contractor.

How would your insurer even know who your neighbours insurers are, if they have one? Is there a central register? What if your neighbour chooses to self insure (eg, has no mortgage and no insurance)?

Of course first resort is with neighbour and contractor, but in the scenario you created, we ascertained that they were being uncooperative. You are totally missing the point. Once handed to the insurers it becomes their problem not mine, that is what I am paying for, I can get on with more important things. I am only interested in getting my problem resolved and really do not care who pays (as long as it is not me) or how much it costs them.

I am not the sort that pays for insurance and is then too scared to claim on it for fear of having a small rise in cost. People generally overestimate the impact a claim may have on their insurance. If I need to use insurance I will, otherwise what is the sense in paying for it. If I want a bit of paper to decorate the walls with I will go to B&Q and buy wall paper not pay for insurance.

I have actually been through this, not with my own house, but with my mum's when work being done at her neighbours caused the slab on which her oil tank was sitting to subside. I had no emotional ties to the neighbour (nice chap but in denial), had no interest in dealing with his contractor and couldn't be bothered wasting my time on it so I just handed it over to my mum's insurance (I had PoA). Their legal team sorted it out (although it took about 3 months), and what happened between the neighbour and contractor is none of my business (but I know that the (quite significant) costs were recouped from one of them or their insurers, no idea which and I really don't care). My mum's insurance went up by less than £4 the following year.

As a reminder to what you said (my bolding):

“If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.”

I'm glad you’ve finally realised you could not expect “the neighbour to sort you out”, nor would you “make a claim on their insurance”.

HillStreetBlues

JGB1955 said:

I imagine an old, decrepit shed is probably worth less than £100.  Pointless the neighbours moaning about it.  They can only ask for the value of the 'old, decrepit, shed'.

And for the cost of installation.

IvanOpinion

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.

If I was that neighbour, I would not give you any insurance details and direct you to the contractor. What’s your next move?

If I did have 'that sort' of neighbour then I would not waste my valuable time on them. I would simply refer it to my insurance, providing full details of the neighbour, and instructing my insurance to seek redress directly from them, or their insurance. That is why I have legal cover bundled with my household insurance, I have already paid for it so I may as well use it.

Fortunately, in this case, it is obvious that the neighbour 'responsible' for the damage is a good neighbour and is looking to take ownership of the situation. If, as the OP suggests, the contractor is reputable, then they should sort out the damage they did without causing a dispute between neighbours.

And your neighbour would direct your insurer to the contractor. What’s your next move?

The neighbour bares no responsibility here, unless they do something daft to make it so.

You are mistaken. But that is irrelevant.
My insurance company would have 'made me whole', and the contractor and my neighbours insurance companies may be fighting it out as to who is going to reimburse my insurance company - I really don't care which one does it.
So as far as I am concerned, game, set, match. Not my problem, no need to waste any more of my valuable time on irresponsible neighbours/contractors.

You are mistaken, in as much as your insurance company would have to deal with the contractors insurance, not your neighbours. And you have a claim on your record. Best you sort it directly with the contractor.

How would your insurer even know who your neighbours insurers are, if they have one? Is there a central register? What if your neighbour chooses to self insure (eg, has no mortgage and no insurance)?

Of course first resort is with neighbour and contractor, but in the scenario you created, we ascertained that they were being uncooperative. You are totally missing the point. Once handed to the insurers it becomes their problem not mine, that is what I am paying for, I can get on with more important things. I am only interested in getting my problem resolved and really do not care who pays (as long as it is not me) or how much it costs them.

I am not the sort that pays for insurance and is then too scared to claim on it for fear of having a small rise in cost. People generally overestimate the impact a claim may have on their insurance. If I need to use insurance I will, otherwise what is the sense in paying for it. If I want a bit of paper to decorate the walls with I will go to B&Q and buy wall paper not pay for insurance.

I have actually been through this, not with my own house, but with my mum's when work being done at her neighbours caused the slab on which her oil tank was sitting to subside. I had no emotional ties to the neighbour (nice chap but in denial), had no interest in dealing with his contractor and couldn't be bothered wasting my time on it so I just handed it over to my mum's insurance (I had PoA). Their legal team sorted it out (although it took about 3 months), and what happened between the neighbour and contractor is none of my business (but I know that the (quite significant) costs were recouped from one of them or their insurers, no idea which and I really don't care). My mum's insurance went up by less than £4 the following year.

As a reminder to what you said (my bolding):

“If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.”

I'm glad you’ve finally realised you could not expect “the neighbour to sort you out”, nor would you “make a claim on their insurance”.

You seem to be getting confused.  After that YOU changed the scenario by saying (my bolding)

"If I was that neighbour, I would not give you any insurance details and direct you to the contractor. What’s your next move?".

In YOUR scenario, in which you asked for the 'next move', I said I would contact my own insurance and let them deal with it. It makes no difference to me if they went after the neighbour directly, their insurance, the contractor or the contractors insurance (all are possibilities), just as long as I am reimbursed. That is exactly why I have insurance, and am not scared to use it. Having said that, if I had a decent neighbour with moral values they would be doing everything they possibly could to sort it out, whether that be to reimburse directly or put it through their insurance or put it through the contractors insurances is their problem, not mine.

MeteredOut

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.

If I was that neighbour, I would not give you any insurance details and direct you to the contractor. What’s your next move?

If I did have 'that sort' of neighbour then I would not waste my valuable time on them. I would simply refer it to my insurance, providing full details of the neighbour, and instructing my insurance to seek redress directly from them, or their insurance. That is why I have legal cover bundled with my household insurance, I have already paid for it so I may as well use it.

Fortunately, in this case, it is obvious that the neighbour 'responsible' for the damage is a good neighbour and is looking to take ownership of the situation. If, as the OP suggests, the contractor is reputable, then they should sort out the damage they did without causing a dispute between neighbours.

And your neighbour would direct your insurer to the contractor. What’s your next move?

The neighbour bares no responsibility here, unless they do something daft to make it so.

You are mistaken. But that is irrelevant.
My insurance company would have 'made me whole', and the contractor and my neighbours insurance companies may be fighting it out as to who is going to reimburse my insurance company - I really don't care which one does it.
So as far as I am concerned, game, set, match. Not my problem, no need to waste any more of my valuable time on irresponsible neighbours/contractors.

You are mistaken, in as much as your insurance company would have to deal with the contractors insurance, not your neighbours. And you have a claim on your record. Best you sort it directly with the contractor.

How would your insurer even know who your neighbours insurers are, if they have one? Is there a central register? What if your neighbour chooses to self insure (eg, has no mortgage and no insurance)?

Of course first resort is with neighbour and contractor, but in the scenario you created, we ascertained that they were being uncooperative. You are totally missing the point. Once handed to the insurers it becomes their problem not mine, that is what I am paying for, I can get on with more important things. I am only interested in getting my problem resolved and really do not care who pays (as long as it is not me) or how much it costs them.

I am not the sort that pays for insurance and is then too scared to claim on it for fear of having a small rise in cost. People generally overestimate the impact a claim may have on their insurance. If I need to use insurance I will, otherwise what is the sense in paying for it. If I want a bit of paper to decorate the walls with I will go to B&Q and buy wall paper not pay for insurance.

I have actually been through this, not with my own house, but with my mum's when work being done at her neighbours caused the slab on which her oil tank was sitting to subside. I had no emotional ties to the neighbour (nice chap but in denial), had no interest in dealing with his contractor and couldn't be bothered wasting my time on it so I just handed it over to my mum's insurance (I had PoA). Their legal team sorted it out (although it took about 3 months), and what happened between the neighbour and contractor is none of my business (but I know that the (quite significant) costs were recouped from one of them or their insurers, no idea which and I really don't care). My mum's insurance went up by less than £4 the following year.

As a reminder to what you said (my bolding):

“If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.”

I'm glad you’ve finally realised you could not expect “the neighbour to sort you out”, nor would you “make a claim on their insurance”.

You seem to be getting confused.  After that YOU changed the scenario by saying (my bolding)

"If I was that neighbour, I would not give you any insurance details and direct you to the contractor. What’s your next move?".

In YOUR scenario, in which you asked for the 'next move', I said I would contact my own insurance and let them deal with it. It makes no difference to me if they went after the neighbour directly, their insurance, the contractor or the contractors insurance (all are possibilities), just as long as I am reimbursed. That is exactly why I have insurance, and am not scared to use it. Having said that, if I had a decent neighbour with moral values they would be doing everything they possibly could to sort it out, whether that be to reimburse directly or put it through their insurance or put it through the contractors insurances is their problem, not mine.

Just stop digging mate; it's not a good look.

IvanOpinion

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

MeteredOut said:

IvanOpinion said:

If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.

If I was that neighbour, I would not give you any insurance details and direct you to the contractor. What’s your next move?

If I did have 'that sort' of neighbour then I would not waste my valuable time on them. I would simply refer it to my insurance, providing full details of the neighbour, and instructing my insurance to seek redress directly from them, or their insurance. That is why I have legal cover bundled with my household insurance, I have already paid for it so I may as well use it.

Fortunately, in this case, it is obvious that the neighbour 'responsible' for the damage is a good neighbour and is looking to take ownership of the situation. If, as the OP suggests, the contractor is reputable, then they should sort out the damage they did without causing a dispute between neighbours.

And your neighbour would direct your insurer to the contractor. What’s your next move?

The neighbour bares no responsibility here, unless they do something daft to make it so.

You are mistaken. But that is irrelevant.
My insurance company would have 'made me whole', and the contractor and my neighbours insurance companies may be fighting it out as to who is going to reimburse my insurance company - I really don't care which one does it.
So as far as I am concerned, game, set, match. Not my problem, no need to waste any more of my valuable time on irresponsible neighbours/contractors.

You are mistaken, in as much as your insurance company would have to deal with the contractors insurance, not your neighbours. And you have a claim on your record. Best you sort it directly with the contractor.

How would your insurer even know who your neighbours insurers are, if they have one? Is there a central register? What if your neighbour chooses to self insure (eg, has no mortgage and no insurance)?

Of course first resort is with neighbour and contractor, but in the scenario you created, we ascertained that they were being uncooperative. You are totally missing the point. Once handed to the insurers it becomes their problem not mine, that is what I am paying for, I can get on with more important things. I am only interested in getting my problem resolved and really do not care who pays (as long as it is not me) or how much it costs them.

I am not the sort that pays for insurance and is then too scared to claim on it for fear of having a small rise in cost. People generally overestimate the impact a claim may have on their insurance. If I need to use insurance I will, otherwise what is the sense in paying for it. If I want a bit of paper to decorate the walls with I will go to B&Q and buy wall paper not pay for insurance.

I have actually been through this, not with my own house, but with my mum's when work being done at her neighbours caused the slab on which her oil tank was sitting to subside. I had no emotional ties to the neighbour (nice chap but in denial), had no interest in dealing with his contractor and couldn't be bothered wasting my time on it so I just handed it over to my mum's insurance (I had PoA). Their legal team sorted it out (although it took about 3 months), and what happened between the neighbour and contractor is none of my business (but I know that the (quite significant) costs were recouped from one of them or their insurers, no idea which and I really don't care). My mum's insurance went up by less than £4 the following year.

As a reminder to what you said (my bolding):

“If a contractor at a neighbours did damage to my property, I would be expecting the neighbour to sort me out, or I would make a claim against their insurance. They can have the hassle of chasing their contractor.”

I'm glad you’ve finally realised you could not expect “the neighbour to sort you out”, nor would you “make a claim on their insurance”.

You seem to be getting confused.  After that YOU changed the scenario by saying (my bolding)

"If I was that neighbour, I would not give you any insurance details and direct you to the contractor. What’s your next move?".

In YOUR scenario, in which you asked for the 'next move', I said I would contact my own insurance and let them deal with it. It makes no difference to me if they went after the neighbour directly, their insurance, the contractor or the contractors insurance (all are possibilities), just as long as I am reimbursed. That is exactly why I have insurance, and am not scared to use it. Having said that, if I had a decent neighbour with moral values they would be doing everything they possibly could to sort it out, whether that be to reimburse directly or put it through their insurance or put it through the contractors insurances is their problem, not mine.

Just stop digging mate; it's not a good look.

I was going to say the same to you but in the end chose to take a more mature approach to debate.
Let's just agree to disagree.

dearface

Thanks for everyone's comments.  Clearly not a standard answer!

Either way, I'm still hoping the landscaper will cover the cost of a shed (they're pretty cheap let's be honest, and there appears to be a dawning realisation on their part that they may be responsible), and should the landscaper fail to adequately compensate then I'll come to an agreement privately with the neighbour.  Good relations with the neighbour is worth a lot more than the relatively miserly cost of a shed.

lincroft1710

dearface said:

Thanks for everyone's comments.  Clearly not a standard answer!

Either way, I'm still hoping the landscaper will cover the cost of a shed (they're pretty cheap let's be honest, and there appears to be a dawning realisation on their part that they may be responsible), and should the landscaper fail to adequately compensate then I'll come to an agreement privately with the neighbour.  Good relations with the neighbour is worth a lot more than the relatively miserly cost of a shed.

Depends what size the shed is. You can get bottom of the range 6 ft x 4 ft sheds for under £300. Anything decent and larger can cost upwards of £1000. But given the neighbour's shed was on its last legs a cheap replacement would not be unreasonable.