Subsidence excess

aliley61

Hi wondering if anyone can help. I have two trees at the side of my house maintained by the LA. They haven’t maintained them and now I have subsidence, my house has been monitored for two years, finally they have agreed to remove trees but no underpinning required as not bad enough ! I was told at the beginning of this process that should it be proven that the LA were at fault I would be able to claim my £1000 excess back and it wouldn’t go down as a claim, now AVIVA are telling me the subsidence company has to confirm this not them. Also they put my insurance up over £600 over the past two years, I feel like I’m being backed into a corner and no way out. Can anyone advise, many thanks 

DullGreyGuy

You insurance excess is always payable no matter of fault. In principle if someone else is to blame for the situation then you and your insurers can sue them for both your excess and their outlay. If this is successful then obv you get your excess back and it counts as a non-fault claim with £0 cost for your insurer. 

This sort of action is very common in Motor insurance where about 1/2 of claims involve another party. In Home it's fairly rare as most claims are for weather related issues or accident damage where no one is at fault for what happened and it's just life sucking a bit. 

It is potentially possible to claim the owners of the tree are liable for damage their roots caused but it is hard work and has relatively low success rates. It really comes down to just how close they are to the property, if the property or the trees came first, what species of tree they are, when they were planted etc. 

aliley61

Hi it has been proven that the trees and neglect of the LA in managing them is the cause of this and they have agreed in principle to remove them but now our insurance has gone up around £500 and they’re trying to tell us it’s got nothing to do with the subsidence which they are saying is a claim, yet we were told it wouldn’t go down as a claim if proven which it has been. The say the increase is because of huge increase of claims generally and prices of everything has gone up !! We have asked for clarification in writing to have the excess refunded and no claim on our policy but now they say it’s not up to them !! I do not know where to go next! 

BarelySentientAI

They could well be right.  Insurance premiums have gone up.

You don't get the excess back just because the LA has agreed to remove the trees.  You would get it back when your insurer successfully sues the LA (or their insurer) for the money.

And it was still a claim, even if they do successfully sue.

aliley61

I was told today that it will not go down as a claim and the subsidence will try their best to recover the money on my behalf. It has been going on for two years and there are cracks inside the house which were not there last year and my driveway has movement, it wasn’t like this last year, if the LA had been more pro active the problem would not be as bad ! I may contact the ombudsman as I feel I’m getting a raw deal at the moment, it’s a very stressful experience 

222Johnny222

The ombudsman will likely only look at your complaint after you have gone through your insurers complaint procedure. 

I would suggest this is your starting point. 

BarelySentientAI

aliley61 said:

 if the LA had been more pro active the problem would not be as bad ! I may contact the ombudsman as I feel I’m getting a raw deal at the moment, it’s a very stressful experience 

What actual thing do you think your insurer has done wrong that the ombudsman could put right?

They can't make the council do anything.

aliley61

The LA ignored all the communications from the subsidence company until recently when I involved my MP. I don’t think it’s fair that my insurance company should work out my insurance renewal on the strength of this claim when it hasn’t been finalised yet, first they said it was based on the claim then they said it wasn’t !! 

BarelySentientAI

The LA is not the insurer's problem, not is it the ombudsman's.

Are you suggesting that they should have ignored the fact that you have made a claim when deciding the renewal price?