Buildings insurance claim rejected. Bit shocked

sophlouwhit

We have tried to make a buildings insurance claim and it has been rejected and it feels wrong. It says on policy they cover escape of water from aparatus, pipe etc…
we have had a fridge freezer leak and cause subfloor damage over the last week while on holiday. We deemed to broke and replaced it, we wouldnt risk carrying on using it. Its about 3 years old.

anyway despite the damage being from water they have rejected the claim on this basis: 

16. All Other Damage

All risks of accidental damage to the property insured excluding:

v) mechanical or electrical breakdown or derangement of the particular machine, apparatus or equipment in which such breakdown or derangement originates.

This doesnt seem right as its water damage? An escape of water? Etc? Please advise next steps as i am not sure what they do actually cover if not this…

Phoenix72

Basically that clause does not cover damage caused by equipment breakdown that causes the damage. In this case your fridge has broken down and leaked = damage not covered.

It would cover a burst water pipe, or water tank as an example.

TSx

That wording is very unusual - I've never seen the term derangement in a policy, and the definitions I can find for it relate to mental illness.

I don't think it's clear enough - if you have accidental damage, the broken down appliance shouldn't be covered but the resultant damage should (the flooring). It is not an escape of water but it is an accidental damage claim. The technical insurance answer is that the proximate cause is the breakdown so no cover for anything but the financial ombudsman are very reluctant to follow that line.

You can make a complaint to the insurer and if still unhappy escalate to the financial ombudsman which is free of charge to you (and they are generally a good ombudsman, who will consider everything fairly to all parties).

BarelySentientAI

TSx said:

That wording is very unusual - I've never seen the term derangement in a policy, and the definitions I can find for it relate to mental illness.

Whenever I've seen "derangement" it's meant something like "loss of function without external symptoms"

DullGreyGuy

sophlouwhit said:

We have tried to make a buildings insurance claim and it has been rejected and it feels wrong. It says on policy they cover escape of water from aparatus, pipe etc…
we have had a fridge freezer leak and cause subfloor damage over the last week while on holiday. We deemed to broke and replaced it, we wouldnt risk carrying on using it. Its about 3 years old.

anyway despite the damage being from water they have rejected the claim on this basis: 

16. All Other Damage

All risks of accidental damage to the property insured excluding:

v) mechanical or electrical breakdown or derangement of the particular machine, apparatus or equipment in which such breakdown or derangement originates.

This doesnt seem right as its water damage? An escape of water? Etc? Please advise next steps as i am not sure what they do actually cover if not this…

Do you have a public link to your policy book? 

Need to understand definition of EoW as some include appliances and others dont; would be generally interesting to see how it's constructed and what's in the general section too. 

In principle it seems they are looking at it as AD rather than EoW and hence the breakdown exclusion is being highlighted. 

sophlouwhit

DullGreyGuy said:

sophlouwhit said:

We have tried to make a buildings insurance claim and it has been rejected and it feels wrong. It says on policy they cover escape of water from aparatus, pipe etc…
we have had a fridge freezer leak and cause subfloor damage over the last week while on holiday. We deemed to broke and replaced it, we wouldnt risk carrying on using it. Its about 3 years old.

anyway despite the damage being from water they have rejected the claim on this basis: 

16. All Other Damage

All risks of accidental damage to the property insured excluding:

v) mechanical or electrical breakdown or derangement of the particular machine, apparatus or equipment in which such breakdown or derangement originates.

This doesnt seem right as its water damage? An escape of water? Etc? Please advise next steps as i am not sure what they do actually cover if not this…

Do you have a public link to your policy book? 

Need to understand definition of EoW as some include appliances and others dont; would be generally interesting to see how it's constructed and what's in the general section too. 

In principle it seems they are looking at it as AD rather than EoW and hence the breakdown exclusion is being highlighted. 

I dont sorry, its Zurich tho.
i replied via email and said it is escape of water damage - not accidental - fridge freezer has leaked… awaiting a response but it seems ridiculous to attempt to say this is accidental claim vs escape of water claim. They asked if fridge freezer was broken, i said we had replaced it incase due to damage its caused which is fairly significant to be honest and didnt want to continue the risk forward.

sophlouwhit

TSx said:

That wording is very unusual - I've never seen the term derangement in a policy, and the definitions I can find for it relate to mental illness.

I don't think it's clear enough - if you have accidental damage, the broken down appliance shouldn't be covered but the resultant damage should (the flooring). It is not an escape of water but it is an accidental damage claim. The technical insurance answer is that the proximate cause is the breakdown so no cover for anything but the financial ombudsman are very reluctant to follow that line.

You can make a complaint to the insurer and if still unhappy escalate to the financial ombudsman which is free of charge to you (and they are generally a good ombudsman, who will consider everything fairly to all parties).

I dont really understand it. Fridge freezers broken or something (been replaced) we havent asked for a new fridge freezer we have mentioned only the floor/sub floor. Its Zurich. I see it as a escape of water damage myself, i will be complaining once i get a email reply etc.

BarelySentientAI

sophlouwhit said:

TSx said:

That wording is very unusual - I've never seen the term derangement in a policy, and the definitions I can find for it relate to mental illness.

I don't think it's clear enough - if you have accidental damage, the broken down appliance shouldn't be covered but the resultant damage should (the flooring). It is not an escape of water but it is an accidental damage claim. The technical insurance answer is that the proximate cause is the breakdown so no cover for anything but the financial ombudsman are very reluctant to follow that line.

You can make a complaint to the insurer and if still unhappy escalate to the financial ombudsman which is free of charge to you (and they are generally a good ombudsman, who will consider everything fairly to all parties).

I dont really understand it. Fridge freezers broken or something (been replaced) we havent asked for a new fridge freezer we have mentioned only the floor/sub floor. Its Zurich. I see it as a escape of water damage myself, i will be complaining once i get a email reply etc.

But it doesn't really matter what you see it as.  It matters what the policy wording says it is.  Just like when people claim storm damage but it wasn't actually strong enough winds to be a storm.

Find the policy book and see what it says "escape of water" means.  If it says something like "sudden release of water from a plumbing or heating system" then you can see why it wouldn't be included as that.  If it says "any water being where it shouldn't be" then that's different.

BarelySentientAI

For example - this is a section from a Zurich policy book, but I have no idea if it's in yours:



Under that policy, you haven't had an escape of water.

sophlouwhit

BarelySentientAI said:

For example - this is a section from a Zurich policy book, but I have no idea if it's in yours:



Under that policy, you haven't had an escape of water.

BarelySentientAI said:

sophlouwhit said:

TSx said:

That wording is very unusual - I've never seen the term derangement in a policy, and the definitions I can find for it relate to mental illness.

I don't think it's clear enough - if you have accidental damage, the broken down appliance shouldn't be covered but the resultant damage should (the flooring). It is not an escape of water but it is an accidental damage claim. The technical insurance answer is that the proximate cause is the breakdown so no cover for anything but the financial ombudsman are very reluctant to follow that line.

You can make a complaint to the insurer and if still unhappy escalate to the financial ombudsman which is free of charge to you (and they are generally a good ombudsman, who will consider everything fairly to all parties).

I dont really understand it. Fridge freezers broken or something (been replaced) we havent asked for a new fridge freezer we have mentioned only the floor/sub floor. Its Zurich. I see it as a escape of water damage myself, i will be complaining once i get a email reply etc.

But it doesn't really matter what you see it as.  It matters what the policy wording says it is.  Just like when people claim storm damage but it wasn't actually strong enough winds to be a storm.

Find the policy book and see what it says "escape of water" means.  If it says something like "sudden release of water from a plumbing or heating system" then you can see why it wouldn't be included as that.  If it says "any water being where it shouldn't be" then that's different.

Defined Peril

Fire, lightning, explosion, aircraft and other aerial devices or articles dropped from them, riot, civil commotion, strikers, locked out workers, persons taking part in labour disturbances, earthquake, storm, flood or escape of water from any tank, apparatus or pipe.

I will have to do a keywork search of what they consider escape of water as no clue and cant see this very obviously

DullGreyGuy

sophlouwhit said:
Defined Peril

Fire, lightning, explosion, aircraft and other aerial devices or articles dropped from them, riot, civil commotion, strikers, locked out workers, persons taking part in labour disturbances, earthquake, storm, flood or escape of water from any tank, apparatus or pipe.

I will have to do a keywork search of what they consider escape of water as no clue and cant see this very obviously

It would normally be at the start of the EoW section, definitions vary significantly for example:

John Lewis

You’re covered against loss or damage that results from water escaping from – or freezing in – washing machines, dishwashers, fridges, freezers, fixed water plumbing systems or fixed heating systems.

Direct Line

Water or oil escaping from fixed water or heating systems

We also cover water or oil escaping from:

> underground drains and pipes

> domestic appliances

> storage tanks

Ecclesiastical 

Escape of water from any tank apparatus or pipe including damage to any water tank apparatus or pipe itself caused by freezing of water

Excluding damage

(i) by water discharged or leaking from an installation of automatic sprinklers

(ii) to any building which is unoccupied

So the first two it would be considered a EoW claim but in the last one it wouldn't. 

Zurich's standard policy states:

Escape of water from any fixed appliance, pipe, tank or fish tank plus damage to these items caused by freezing or forcible and violent bursting

However the section numbers dont align to your quote and so whilst the above wouldn't include a freezer that isn't to say your policy wording would or wouldn't.