Repairing ceiling after a water leak

pred02

Hi,

A water heating pipe leaked from our apartment into downstairs neighbours. We got notified at night and by morning we had an emergency plumber come in so the leak was going on for about 12 hours. 

The ceiling has dried out (photo attached), however there is difference in opinion from builders if the ceiling just needs to be repainted (first with water stain primer then repaint) versus cut out and replaced. The downstairs neighbours are worried about mould growth.

What is the best course of action? Is there a way to test the ceiling moisture level where there was a leak to understand if still high to replace versus repaint?

Thanks

sheenas

Plaster is a nightmare when it comes to water. It sucks it up and takes months to dry. Once dry its bloated and hard to paint as the stain comes though. A damp meter can verify if it's dry or not. It's not that hard to cut a section out and tape and scrim. I done a few of these and they look perfect. 

ThisIsWeird

From that pic you seem to have 'got away with it'!
The surface looks flat - is it? No bulges?
The stains look pretty minor - often you can expect 'black', as the water takes through years of dust and debris from the top of the plasterboard.
If the boards are flat, no bumps or bulges, then it is fine to clean, seal and repaint. P'board is surprisingly tolerant of a single soaking - it usually needs prolonged or repeated damp to make it swell and crumble to the point it needs replacing.
First, tho' - that ceiling needs to be fully dry. This could take a few days. Mould should not be a concern - that will only grow over many days or weeks of constant dampness. 
Get the opinion of a recommended & trusted painter&decorator, and listen to what they say.
I'm assuming, since the cause of the leak had now't to do with you, that its repair was covered by the Freeholder, or the communal Buildings insurance? Cool. Well, the damage to your neighbour's ceiling should either be ditto, or by them claiming on their individual content's policy - assuming they have this.
If you are currently considering paying for this ceiling repair yourself, which would be very noble of you, and if your neighb is sounding a bit silly with their demands, then perhaps gently remind them to claim on their contents insurance instead.
(But confirm this first!)

subjecttocontract

Yes I agree. I'd just add that you are only liable if you've been negligent and remember you are not responsible for gravity. 

Grenage

If it's not bulging, and it seems sound after drying out, a coat of oil-based paint (or stain blocker) before paint will be fine. 

As others have commented, it's not for you to resolve.

pred02

Thanks for the feedback. Here is the full setup.

It's a share of freehold in two purpose build flats in a maisonette. I own the upstairs flat (source of leak), another owner has the downstairs flat which is rented out. We both own 50% of the freehold and do not have a management company (or a sunk cost fund), we just deal with costs as they arise.  We have a block of flats building insurance (because downstairs is rented out) that is owned by the freehold (LTD).

The insurance policy has £250 excess of escape of water.   I was looking to see if one of my trusted decorators can address this and repaint and was going to pay for it (I already paid £300 to fix the leak by emergency plumber). However, I now feel like making the claim under insurance and letting the owner downstairs deal with it.

If the damaged amount is low, was going to avoid making the claim to reduce the premium going up on renewal (we split the cost of the insurance policy).

His tenants are young and are worried about mould, even though I believe it's a non-issue as the leak was short and addressed quickly. It's been 4 weeks since the leak, I'll go and lift the floorboard to see if there is any mould and also check the dryness of the ceiling.

If I am to leave to the owner to resolve the problem, who should be liable for paying the £250 excess on insurance?

DullGreyGuy

pred02 said:
If I am to leave to the owner to resolve the problem, who should be liable for paying the £250 excess on insurance?

What does your lease state? It can go either way between being paid by the person that decided to make the claim or being shared amongst all leaseholders like any other cost incurred by the freeholder. 

subjecttocontract

Does the lease say that buildings insurance must be provided by the freeholders ? 

ThisIsWeird

pred02 said:

It's a share of freehold in two purpose build flats in a maisonette. I own the upstairs flat (source of leak), another owner has the downstairs flat which is rented out. We both own 50% of the freehold and do not have a management company (or a sunk cost fund), we just deal with costs as they arise.  We have a block of flats building insurance (because downstairs is rented out) that is owned by the freehold (LTD).
The insurance policy has £250 excess of escape of water.   I was looking to see if one of my trusted decorators can address this and repaint and was going to pay for it (I already paid £300 to fix the leak by emergency plumber). However, I now feel like making the claim under insurance and letting the owner downstairs deal with it.
If the damaged amount is low, was going to avoid making the claim to reduce the premium going up on renewal (we split the cost of the insurance policy).
His tenants are young and are worried about mould, even though I believe it's a non-issue as the leak was short and addressed quickly. It's been 4 weeks since the leak, I'll go and lift the floorboard to see if there is any mould and also check the dryness of the ceiling.
If I am to leave to the owner to resolve the problem, who should be liable for paying the £250 excess on insurance?

Hasn't the insurance claim bird flown? You've already paid a premium for an emergency plumber, instead of calling your insurance company. Before entertaining a claim now, check whether they'll include the plumbing bill you've already paid :-)
The basic principle is, if no-one was actually careless or 'negligent' - eg carried out incompetent DIY, or was aware of a dodgy fitting or issue but did nothing about it, or pulled out a WM dislodging a pipe, or hammered a nail into the floor without checking for pipes, etc etc etc - then it should be a valid insurance claim, and you are best to get them involved asap. They will often have their own emergency plumbers, so there should be no loss by going 'insurance' rather than an independent emergency plumber. (Insurance cos have a vested interest in fixing any leak asap, to reduce their ultimate payout).
Also, since it's a shared policy, any premium increase will be split. And, since it affects more than one property, a 'claim' should save all the awkward discussions about who should pay for what. What's more, there would be no silly discussions about 'mould' - that just won't be an issue, and they'd soon be told this, rather than 'taking your word for it'.

Since this leak wasn't your 'fault', then I believe the repair cost should be shared between the two flat owners (or ideally insurance). 

Regarding this incident, I'd first check they'll cover it all. If they don't - if they say it's too late to cover the actual repair - then it surely isn't now worth a claim? Moving forward, get the policy details clarified - see what it says about emergency call-outs and stuff. Have that info to hand - and give a copy to the other owner.

Moving forward, the two owners should clarify all this, what to do in any future emergency, and also seriously consider and agree things like contributions to a sink fund.

pred02

Here is what the lease said is responsibility of the freeholder (lesor)

To insure the building of which the demised premises forms part (but not the contents thereot) against loss or damage by fire tempest storm and other usual risks in the full rebuilding and reinstatement value thereof and to cause all money received by virtue of such insurance to be laid out forthwith in rebuilding and reinstating the demised premises and to make up

17. 

any deficiency out of their own money (provided that the Lessors' obligation under this covenant shall cease if the insurance shall be rendered void by reason of any act or default of the Lessee) and whenever reasonably required produce to the

Lessee or his mortgagees the policy or policies of such insurance and the receipt for the last premium for the same and in case the demised premises or any part thereof shall at any time be destroyed or damaged by fire or tempest or other

insured risk so as to be unfit for substantial occupation or use and the policy or policies effected by the Lessors shall not have been invalidated or payment of the policy monies refused in

consequence of some act or default of the Lessee the rents hereby reserved or a just and fair proportion thereof according to the nature and extent of the actual damage done and as

certified by the Lessors Surveyor shall be suspended as from the happening of the said risk until the demised premises shall be again rendered fit for occupation and use but the Lease shall in no way be invalidated and in the event of the demised premises being so damaged or destroyed by insured risk to reinstate the same at the Lessors own expense and with all convenient speed.

I further lifted the floorboard where the leak was to test for moisture with moisture meater. The ceiling has the moisture of 8% where the nearest rafter to the leak has moisture content of 13%. I suspect these figures are ok. I did notice white stain mark on the rafter where the leak was. I suspect this is a water stain and not mould?

 

ThisIsWeird

pred02 said:

Here is what the lease said is responsibility of the freeholder (lesor)

To insure the building of which the demised premises forms part (but not the contents thereot) against loss or damage by fire tempest storm and other usual risks in the full rebuilding and reinstatement value thereof and to cause all money received by virtue of such insurance to be laid out forthwith in rebuilding and reinstating the demised premises and to make up

17. 

any deficiency out of their own money (provided that the Lessors' obligation under this covenant shall cease if the insurance shall be rendered void by reason of any act or default of the Lessee) and whenever reasonably required produce to the

Lessee or his mortgagees the policy or policies of such insurance and the receipt for the last premium for the same and in case the demised premises or any part thereof shall at any time be destroyed or damaged by fire or tempest or other

insured risk so as to be unfit for substantial occupation or use and the policy or policies effected by the Lessors shall not have been invalidated or payment of the policy monies refused in

consequence of some act or default of the Lessee the rents hereby reserved or a just and fair proportion thereof according to the nature and extent of the actual damage done and as

certified by the Lessors Surveyor shall be suspended as from the happening of the said risk until the demised premises shall be again rendered fit for occupation and use but the Lease shall in no way be invalidated and in the event of the demised premises being so damaged or destroyed by insured risk to reinstate the same at the Lessors own expense and with all convenient speed.

I further lifted the floorboard where the leak was to test for moisture with moisture meater. The ceiling has the moisture of 8% where the nearest rafter to the leak has moisture content of 13%. I suspect these figures are ok. I did notice white stain mark on the rafter where the leak was. I suspect this is a water stain and not mould?
 

I can't follow legal policy-speak, I'm afraid. Hopefully someone else can determine whether there's anything of note in these passages?

As for 'mould' - there ain't any, and there won't be any, from this incident. And it shouldn't be your issue to keep on reassuring them of this.

No harm in leaving the underfloor uncovered as much as you can to fully hasten the drying process, but no need to respond to any misguided concerns over mould formation.

As soon as the ceiling surface is dry, it should be stain-sealed and painted. Problem over.

If, through any bizarre cause - eg the leak ain't actually been fixed, and it continues to keep the ceiling damp - some mould does appear after a good number of days or weeks, then the cause will obviously need addressing, and then a P&D cleans, seals, and paints as before. 

If specks do appear (which they won't), present the tenants with a trigger-spray of mould killer and a pair of marigolds. This is not your problem - you didn't cause it. 

(Kidding - don't give them these things. Suggest they can get them if they are really concerned).