Insurance claim for laminate flooring following escape of water... advice

bluegoldie

Sadly I have had a leak from my washer, promptly dried it but I have noticed bubbling of my flooring. So here comes the complicated part..... the flooring runs from my hallway through my kitchen as one continuous floor. I understand that they will only replace the "damaged" flooring and this is literally in between the 2 rooms. There are some bubbles in the kitchen and the hallway but localised to one specific area where the water had run. To cap it all the flooring is fitted under my kitchen cupboards and skirting boards (which are practically brand new after a massive plastering and decorating job recently). I have accidental cover for building and contents. With 650 excess I am worried I will be left with a job looking like a pigs ear where they will try a patch up job! Anyone able to advise on this?

BarelySentientAI

The difference between having matching set cover and not.

You might be able to get them to contribute towards getting it all redone if it's that much of an issue, but you would need to pay probably at least half of the cost.

bluegoldie

BarelySentientAI said:

The difference between having matching set cover and not.

You might be able to get them to contribute towards getting it all redone if it's that much of an issue, but you would need to pay probably at least half of the cost.

Yes I checked and its not covered. To be honest i didn't even know it was a thing! If they contributed half I would still need to give them 650 so probably wouldn't be worth it. What a nightmare! So can they literally just cut out the damaged bit of the floor and patch it up? The floor was super expensive (in hindsight should have gone for wood!) And is a good 10 years old, I don't know how they could match it? I'll see what they have to say! Can't believe they can leave it looking like a patchwork quilt mind.....

BarelySentientAI

bluegoldie said:

BarelySentientAI said:

The difference between having matching set cover and not.

You might be able to get them to contribute towards getting it all redone if it's that much of an issue, but you would need to pay probably at least half of the cost.

Yes I checked and its not covered. To be honest i didn't even know it was a thing! If they contributed half I would still need to give them 650 so probably wouldn't be worth it. What a nightmare! So can they literally just cut out the damaged bit of the floor and patch it up? The floor was super expensive (in hindsight should have gone for wood!) And is a good 10 years old, I don't know how they could match it? I'll see what they have to say! Can't believe they can leave it looking like a patchwork quilt mind.....

A lot of people don't know it's a thing, and then end up in a situation like you are.  Things like only getting the sofa replaced but not the matching armchairs, or only 2 of the 6 dining chairs, or flooring like you've found.

One of those things that makes the cheap policies cheap - and most people buy on price and don't really check what's included.

They'll try, obviously, to make it look decent.  They're not going to put down black tiles if you've got white laminate etc.  It will also depend on what the difference in cost is between making a small patch repair look good and replacing a slightly bigger area to hide a joint.  But putting a new piece in a 10 year old floor is probably going to be noticeable unfortunately. 

bluegoldie

Thank you! I'm looking at rugs as we speak. The floor needs to come up as I can already smell the water I will see what happens 

DullGreyGuy

They would pay the full cost of the damaged area less your excess and make a 50% contribution to the rest of the room(s) that the damage is in. There would be no contribution for any area of the same flooring in a different room with no damage. 

Many people seem to think of matching ornaments or jewellery when it comes to Matching Set cover and so many dont know about it and of those that do they say they have no need for it. It can make a massive difference in claims costs and hence budget policies dont offer it to enable them to sell cheaper. 

It does depend somewhat on how extensive the damage is in the rooms and how practicable it would be to just replace the damaged area. With tiling even without matching set cover many insurers will end up doing the wall in a small bathroom etc but would only contribute to the other 3 walls if requested. They often cannot literally just remove and replace 4 tiles. 

bluegoldie

DullGreyGuy said:

They would pay the full cost of the damaged area less your excess and make a 50% contribution to the rest of the room(s) that the damage is in. There would be no contribution for any area of the same flooring in a different room with no damage. 

Many people seem to think of matching ornaments or jewellery when it comes to Matching Set cover and so many dont know about it and of those that do they say they have no need for it. It can make a massive difference in claims costs and hence budget policies dont offer it to enable them to sell cheaper. 

It does depend somewhat on how extensive the damage is in the rooms and how practicable it would be to just replace the damaged area. With tiling even without matching set cover many insurers will end up doing the wall in a small bathroom etc but would only contribute to the other 3 walls if requested. They often cannot literally just remove and replace 4 tiles. 

So the flooring is in the hallway and the kitchen and runs throughout both. Initially I could see bubbles in the area between the 2 rooms. On closer inspection I can actually feel that there are boards which have swollen at the join so looks like the damage is more extensive than at first glance! Besides the cosmetic damage which in truth I'd have happily put a rug over, I'm concerned about the fact there may be water underneath and the long term damage that will make (not to mention the smell!) I would say 50% of the hallway boards and 25% of the kitchen ones are damaged. Wouldn't be so bad if it was a rubbish old floor but it's immaculate and I had zero intention of changing for a few years 🤦‍♀️ I will see what they come back with 

Martyn_H

Would your insurer insist on a like for like replacement? Laminate or wood is a poor choice IMO for a kitchen or bathroom. I'd take the opportunity to find a more suitable kitchen flooring in case this happens again. 

BarelySentientAI

Martyn_H said:

Would your insurer insist on a like for like replacement? Laminate or wood is a poor choice IMO for a kitchen or bathroom. I'd take the opportunity to find a more suitable kitchen flooring in case this happens again. 

Insurers very rarely insist on specifics like that.  They're usually amenable to whatever version of solution the policyholder wants, up to and including just writing a check and walking away with no restrictions on what you do with the money.

They won't pay more because something different is wanted though.

bluegoldie

Martyn_H said:

Would your insurer insist on a like for like replacement? Laminate or wood is a poor choice IMO for a kitchen or bathroom. I'd take the opportunity to find a more suitable kitchen flooring in case this happens again. 

To be fair it is a top spec floor designed for kitchens and bathrooms not the run of the mill stuff. The damage wasn't caused by the surface water but the water that got underneath it from seeping between the skirting boards. Its been down for 15 years and is immaculate so I don't know that they would think it was a poor choice. I have luckily kept all the specifications for the floor as it came with a 25 year warranty. Sadly the specific colour had been discontinued or I'd be buying a few packs and sorting it myself..... the only non penetrative option would be tiles I suppose but then they come with their own set of issues.