Freeholder’s tenants caused damage.

3PurplegreenCats

Complicated insurance situation - can anyone clarify please?
My bf recently bought a ground floor flat in a three story building; his is leasehold only. Freehold is jointly owned by two people; one lives in the top floor flat, the other lives elsewhere and rents out the middle flat. My bf & the two freeholders each pay a third of the buildings insurance. 
A few months ago the tenant in the middle flat left a tap on & my bf returned home to find water coming through his ceiling. Walls & ceiling seem to have eventually dried out & just need repainting, but there was permanent damage caused to the laminate flooring. It’s an old laminate type which is no longer available, so the whole thing needs to be replaced, although it’s not a big space. He contacted the freeholder who is landlord of flat above & was given details of insurers to make a claim himself.
Insurers have agreed the claim (which is “like for like”) & told him that a £250 excess will be deducted.
As the same type of laminate is no longer sold, my bf has asked if he can put in more expensive flooring, to match what he’s put in elsewhere in the flat already, and he will pay the difference himself. Insurers have said that’s ok, but it will increase the cost of the policy next year. This will affect the other two policy holders as well - who are not happy.

This has thrown up two issues which don’t seem right to me. Firstly, it appears the freeholder who rents out the middle flat is trying to claim on the buildings policy for the whole building. As a landlord shouldn’t he have specific insurance that covers damage caused by his tenants, separate to the buildings insurance? And shouldn’t he (or his tenants) be meeting the cost of any excess?
Secondly, my bf’s flat requires improvement of quite basic things; floors, doors, kitchen units etc (the previous owner had really let it go) - how much would this really put up the buildings insurance, & if it’s inside his flat does it have anything to do with the freeholders? As an aside it seems rather unfair anyway that he pays the same insurance cost, as their flats are larger. 

DE_612183

I would have thought that buildings insurance does NOT cover what's happened.

It may be flood damage - but not in the way Buildings insurance means Flood!

DullGreyGuy

A landlord isn't liable for the actions of their tenant, if you or the buildings insurer want to try and hold the tenant liable the claim would be made against them and if they have contents insurance they can pass it to them to defend them. 

To be able to make a claim against the tenant you would need to show they have been negligent which often isn't the case where a washing machine has sprung a leak or a pipe has burst etc. Would need more detail on how the flood happened, what they'd been doing etc etc to try and determine what hopes you'd have. 


Fixtures and fitting in a Block policy are normally limited to the original standard that were present when the building was first leased. Practically the freeholder isn't going to know what kitchens are in the 300 flats in a large development thats 30 years old to be able to make an appropriate declaration hence most are fixed at the original. For those leaseholders that want to change their kitchen for a bespoke Roundhouse kitchen with Wolf and SubZero appliances they'd normally need to ensure their Contents insurance includes Tenants Improvements. 

In principle a Block policy could consider imrpovements if the freeholder can confirm them but it makes me more wonder if they aren't buying block but something other, maybe inappropriate, class. 

eddddy

3PurplegreenCats said:

As an aside it seems rather unfair anyway that he pays the same insurance cost, as their flats are larger. 

His lease will say what fraction or percentage he has to pay of insurance costs, and other shared costs.

Assuming the lease says he has to pay 1/3rd - a lawyer would say he should have read the lease before buying, and if he didn't want to pay a 1/3rd of the shared costs, he shouldn't have bought the flat.

So there wouldn't really be scope for arguing on that point.

Aretnap

DE_612183 said:

I would have thought that buildings insurance does NOT cover what's happened.

It may be flood damage - but not in the way Buildings insurance means Flood!

It would not be covered under food damage, which means water entering the building from an external source, but depending on the policy wording might be covered as either escape of water or accidental damage.