Imploded cylinder after plumbing work - should we claim via plumbers public liability insurance?

clairelojo

Hope you have a loss adjuster and/or post-incident plumber report that can suggest the most likely cause of the failure.  If that professional report points the finger at your workman then your Insurers are bound to want to pursue their cost recovery from him?

It is the same plumber who did the rad work and then subsequent install of the cylinder to confirm what he believed the cause of the original cylinder implosion was (I was implosion as the cylinder is indented and extremely distorted). I would have thought that the insurer would have requested an independent opinion / report.

clairelojo

 unvented cylinder 

it was a vented cylinder that was installed, and the plumber believed that the vent was somehow blocked and caused the implosion - which happened after work on the rads. There must of been some contact needed with the cylinder as we had to empty our airing cupboard to give access to the cylinder, and the water tank in the attic space above it

Aylesbury_Duck

clairelojo said:

km1500 said:

don't forget plumber is only liable if they are negligent or work in a way that is not the way a normal plumber would work - not sure of the legal expression

this means you are assuming that it is the plumber's negligence that cause the leak but it may well be something else. this needs to be established.

there is also the element of your contribution to the disaster - was it wise to leave for a two-day vacation in the middle of major plumbing work that had not even been completed 

I'm only pointing out here things that needs to be considered and not in any way blaming you

Given he has done the same work in the past with no issues, I wouldn't have any reason to believe that there should be a problem. I didn't think removing radiators / changing a valve would be classed as major works.

Nevertheless, it's something your insurer might ask about, so it's helpful for you to be forewarned.  From their point of view, they might argue that the claim is larger than it might have been following a series of events where you left a tradesperson to secure your house after you left for two days, after undertaking work you were unable to check before he left.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Sorry to hear OP, it surprising how devastating water can be when it leaks in the house, hopefully the insurer will cover the damage  

Regarding the plumber, services should be carried out with due care and skill, where they aren't you can claim a price reduction or damages. In either case AFAIK burden of proof (for going via small claims, which is on the balance of probability, i.e 50/50) is placed upon yourself. 

Might be worth getting someone out to do an independent inspection and put something in writing to say what the cause of the issue was. If it can be shown to be the plumber's "fault" then rather than claiming back what was paid you'd probably be looking at claiming the cost of having it put right (excluding what the insurer will cover).

Random thought, if the plumber was to blame would the insurer look to get the money back from the plumber or do they just take the cost of these things on the chin?