Subsidence/not Subsidence

Spoony68

We put a claim in to check for subsidence on our porch, the porch was an addition to original building. Someone came out did a bit of digging and said the work was poor quality and the foundations should have been deeper. No repairs were needed, but it is down as a subsidence claim on the renewal for £3679.  This is making getting building insurance difficult, even though there is nothing wrong structurally with the house, this was built in 1930 and the claim was only relating to the porch which was probably built around 10 years ago. All we have had to do is a replace a bit of mortar. Panic set in for us as first time buyers and now we're paying the cost for our mistake. Any advice would be appreciated.

Annemos

Oh welcome to the Forum. Even it is about a less than agreeable topic. 



The only thing I can think of, is for you to approach that previous Insurer to try and get the CUE Entry changed to a different description. 

(They have 8 weeks to respond, then you can go to the Ombudsman with a Complaint if necessary.) 

Will this work?  

Your issue was Cracking due to the Poor Quality Building of a porch (that was not part of the original building) and its insufficient foundations. So I wonder if the FOS Ombudsman could perhaps agree that this is not a case of Subsidence? But I am not a Building Expert, so I am not sure. 

Subsidence is the downward movement of ground under the foundations. If that was never proved by taking any soil samples etc, then can one say it was definitely Subsidence? What exactly did the Report say when they closed out that Claim. Did they ever say it was actually Subsidence?

The claim was opened up as a Subsidence Claim, but should it have been closed out as one?? Should it now have a different description? 


Here are a couple of cases as examples where the CUE is discussed:  where there was a potential mischaracterisation on the CUE.

Things stay on the CUE for 7 years from the Date of Closure of the Claim. The other advantage of getting it changed, is that you would not have to mention the actual S word in future. 




At the end of this one it says towards the end.....

Ms G has raised concerns about the way in which Admiral has recorded her claim in the Claims and Underwriting Exchange (‘CUE’). This has been recorded as a subsidence claim. As the claim was for crack damage, I don’t think it was unreasonable for Admiral to record the claim as subsidence. If that turns out not to be the case, then Admiral should update CUE

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4370001.pdf



This one they changed the CUE record from Subsidence to Cracking. It also discusses elevated premiums. (This one was found to be roof spread) 


https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4149467.pdf



This one also discusses the CUE in some detail: 


https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4830094.pdf



I was actually looking for other information on the CUE when I found these cases a few months ago. I did not do a search on the word PORCH. 

You might like to try some more searches on such things as  "PORCH SUBSIDENCE CUE"   etc, to see if you can find any closer cases to your own. 


https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decisions-case-studies/ombudsman-decisions


Good luck. Maybe other Posters can also comment on whether what I am saying sounds reasonable. 

Annemos

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-3306309.pdf


Came across this one recently... maybe this is more like yours?  It was a poorly converted garage. The FOS ruled that this stayed on the CUE as a Subsidence Claim,  but it was listed as "Repudiated" on the CUE. And the Insurer also provided a Letter to show new Insurers. 

Does your CUE entry show Repudiated, if that was the case? Have you had a Formal Letter of Explanation what the Cause was? 

It provided a letter for them to show to future insurers to inform them of the outcome of the claim.


I’ve considered if Ecclesiastical’s record of the claim is fair. I’ve seen how it appears on CUE – an insurance industry database. Under ‘Cause’ it says ‘Subsidence, Heave Landslip’. It currently shows a status of ‘open’ with a payment total of £0. Ecclesiastical says when this complaint is finalised the record will show payment of around £4,000. The status will be ‘repudiated’.