Repairing ceiling after a water leak

pred02

I checked the policy which says it covers.

Escape of water or oil loss or damage to buildings caused by; f) Water escaping from any fixed domestic water or heating installation, washing machine, dishwasher, refrigerator, freezer or fixed fish tank; g) oil escaping from any fixed domestic heating installation.
Trace and Access costs and expenses incurred to locate the source of a water leak and loss or damage caused by locating the source, following damage covered under ‘6. Escape of water or oil’. We will pay the costs you incur in locating the source of the leak up to £2,500 for any one claim.

I assume this means that the repair of the leak I would need to pay out of pocket, which I did by emergency plumbers which cost me £300 cash.

I notified the owner who has tenants.  

Upon return from holidays on Sunday, the landlord downstairs says that he found a builder who is going to repair this for £1500 as the ceiling needs to come out to be replaced. 

The builder said  “Damp patches can cause mildew and respiratory problems, if left untreated, so is a health and safety issue unfortunately and does need to be dealt with as soon as possible.”

The tenants downstairs are nervous as for mould and damp.

I checked with my own decorator who said that it just needs to be repainted £200 plus materials £80 - £280 quid.

So my options now are:

1. Go back to the owner and say fine, you deal with insurance claim I'll pay half the excess.
2. Advise that mould is non-issue (I checked damp levels as per above and they are normal), it does not make sense, can get my builder in to repair for £280. 

If I did not split the cost of insurance policy I would not care and just let him deal with the insurance, but I am. I also believe the builder he got is taking advantage needing to replace the ceiling and making a deal of the mould issue.

However, it is likely I will sell my apartment this year therefore I assume that on the new property I would not need to disclose of any claims (this property is under LTD not my name).

What is the right thing to do? I had good relationships with the owner downstairs.

ThisIsWeird

pred02 said:

I checked the policy which says it covers.

Escape of water or oil loss or damage to buildings caused by; f) Water escaping from any fixed domestic water or heating installation, washing machine, dishwasher, refrigerator, freezer or fixed fish tank; g) oil escaping from any fixed domestic heating installation.

Trace and Access costs and expenses incurred to locate the source of a water leak and loss or damage caused by locating the source, following damage covered under ‘6. Escape of water or oil’. We will pay the costs you incur in locating the source of the leak up to £2,500 for any one claim.
I assume this means that the repair of the leak I would need to pay out of pocket, which I did by emergency plumbers which cost me £300 cash.
I notified the owner who has tenants. 
Upon return from holidays on Sunday, the landlord downstairs says that he found a builder who is going to repair this for £1500 as the ceiling needs to come out to be replaced.
The builder said  “Damp patches can cause mildew and respiratory problems, if left untreated, so is a health and safety issue unfortunately and does need to be dealt with as soon as possible.”
The tenants downstairs are nervous as for mould and damp.
I checked with my own decorator who said that it just needs to be repainted £200 plus materials £80 - £280 quid.
So my options now are:
1. Go back to the owner and say fine, you deal with insurance claim I'll pay half the excess.
2. Advise that mould is non-issue (I checked damp levels as per above and they are normal), it does not make sense, can get my builder in to repair for £280.
If I did not split the cost of insurance policy I would not care and just let him deal with the insurance, but I am. I also believe the builder he got is taking advantage needing to replace the ceiling and making a deal of the mould issue.
However, it is likely I will sell my apartment this year therefore I assume that on the new property I would not need to disclose of any claims (this property is under LTD not my name).
What is the right thing to do? I had good relationships with the owner downstairs.

Again, I find it hard to follow insurance T&Cs, but I'd be gobsmacked if the policy did not cover this issue, from start to finish. Possibly it won't cover 'decorating' (tho' I think most will), but should cover locating and sorting a leak, and replacing a damaged ceiling (which I'm still hoping this isn't).

In addition, this policy has 'trace and access' cover, which is good, as that can often be the worst part - ripping up floors and stuff to locate the leak. Again, tho', it makes 'sense' for policies to have this kind of service, as they will personally want the leak sorted asap - it costs them for any more damage caused. And they aren't going to 'trace and access' the leak only to stand there pointing at it - 'repair' will also be included.

So, I'm going to say, with 99% certainty, that had you called them up first, this issue would have been fully handled by them, and all you'd be worrying about is the 'excess' - which would then be split two ways.

(Remind yourself - you did NOT cause this. This is NOT your 'fault'.)

And now we have an idiot owner and a dodgy builder.

I'd say your two options remain - you offer to pay for your P&D to make good the ceiling, and that will mean you'll be £580 out of pocket in total, and let that be a salutary lesson to you :-). Or you inform the other owner - if they insist on having the ceiling come down - to claim on the insurance. BUT, you insist on 3 quotes for the work, one of which will be the opinion of another P&D (to see if they back up the first one's option).

“Damp patches can cause mildew and respiratory problems, if left untreated, so is a health and safety issue unfortunately and does need to be dealt with as soon as possible.” is a faragism - a simplistic and opportunistic statement of the bleedin' obvious, taken out of the current context. A 3rd opinion is required.

Imv, the only reason a ceiling would need replacing is because it has physically 'failed'; it's bulging or has collapsed.

pred02

I've clarified with the insurer, since we had no emergency cover on the policy, I or we would have had to pay for the plumber to investigate the leak. The policy overs any costs of repair after the leak has been fixed.

subjecttocontract

It seems the lease requires the freeholders to put buildings insurance in place......NOT insurance that requires an excess....but full insurance cover. So if a claim is made the freeholders should reimburse the claimant with the cost of the excess. 

Currently the freeholders are not complying with the requirements of the lease. Presumably they agreed to effect insurance at a reduced premium by accepting an excess on claims. That means they are not providing full insurance cover on the properties. 

ThisIsWeird

pred02 said:

Is there any reason why I can't now claim on the £300 to locate and repair the leak on insurance, let the owner downstairs deal with tenants and builders and pay my half of the excess?
There is no emergency number on the policy or anything that requires to use the insurance services. I guess I can call the insurance to find out if they will cover the amount I spent.
Ok so freeholders pay up which is up meaning 50/50 on the excess. 

I really don't know, but suspect it'll be too complicated for the insurance co. I'd suggest they either handle the whole claim, or nothing. I'm sure they'll think it great that you found an emergency plumber, and that it 'only' cost £300, but if they then need to juggle two separate claims - the first to refund your £300, and then the other party to make good the rest - it just becomes too complicated; they don't work that way. 

But you won't know unless you ask - I see no harm is calling them up and explaining the situation; you had a leak in the middle of the night, called out an emerg plumber, they fixed it, you paid them, but fear you now need to make a claim for the 'making good'; will they cover the first bill too?

You are both 'directors' of the Freehold company, yes? Then you should work together on this. I suspect that if you'd contacted the insurance co at the start, they'd have sent out an emergency plumber, and then an assessor to check on the damage. If the assessor found only a damp ceiling as shown in your pic, but otherwise intact, I imagine they'd perhaps provide a dehumidifier (but possibly not), and then suggest leaving it for a few days to fully dry, whereupon they'll arrange for a P&D.

But, I don't know. Perhaps they just go in and redo it all - but that's potentially a very messy job, and far more disruptive to the tenants.

All I would say for definite is, if the owner below is thinking that you will personally pay for a new ceiling, you need to disabuse him of his presumption right away - that just ain't going to happen. So, it's either P&D - for which you should both contribute equally - or he gets on with the insurance. For the latter, he should agree to submit your paid invoice for the plumbing repair too, and I'd like to think the insurance will cover it - but they may not. And they may not pay for a new ceiling either - not unless it's needed. So, the claim payment could be as little as £300 + £280, in which case you're both better off digging into your pockets for it.

If the insurance co won't pay for your plumbing repair, then the other owner should offer half towards this too - but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Remember - this was an unanticipated accident, and should be handled jointly. Not your fault. It is a joint responsibility.

Moving forward, have a list of emergency responses stuck to the inside of a kitchen door!

pred02

ThisIsWeird said:

pred02 said:

Is there any reason why I can't now claim on the £300 to locate and repair the leak on insurance, let the owner downstairs deal with tenants and builders and pay my half of the excess?
There is no emergency number on the policy or anything that requires to use the insurance services. I guess I can call the insurance to find out if they will cover the amount I spent.
Ok so freeholders pay up which is up meaning 50/50 on the excess. 

I really don't know, but suspect it'll be too complicated for the insurance co. I'd suggest they either handle the whole claim, or nothing. I'm sure they'll think it great that you found an emergency plumber, and that it 'only' cost £300, but if they then need to juggle two separate claims - the first to refund your £300, and then the other party to make good the rest - it just becomes too complicated; they don't work that way. 

But you won't know unless you ask - I see no harm is calling them up and explaining the situation; you had a leak in the middle of the night, called out an emerg plumber, they fixed it, you paid them, but fear you now need to make a claim for the 'making good'; will they cover the first bill too?

You are both 'directors' of the Freehold company, yes? Then you should work together on this. I suspect that if you'd contacted the insurance co at the start, they'd have sent out an emergency plumber, and then an assessor to check on the damage. If the assessor found only a damp ceiling as shown in your pic, but otherwise intact, I imagine they'd perhaps provide a dehumidifier (but possibly not), and then suggest leaving it for a few days to fully dry, whereupon they'll arrange for a P&D.

But, I don't know. Perhaps they just go in and redo it all - but that's potentially a very messy job, and far more disruptive to the tenants.

All I would say for definite is, if the owner below is thinking that you will personally pay for a new ceiling, you need to disabuse him of his presumption right away - that just ain't going to happen. So, it's either P&D - for which you should both contribute equally - or he gets on with the insurance. For the latter, he should agree to submit your paid invoice for the plumbing repair too, and I'd like to think the insurance will cover it - but they may not. And they may not pay for a new ceiling either - not unless it's needed. So, the claim payment could be as little as £300 + £280, in which case you're both better off digging into your pockets for it.

If the insurance co won't pay for your plumbing repair, then the other owner should offer half towards this too - but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Remember - this was an unanticipated accident, and should be handled jointly. Not your fault. It is a joint responsibility.

Moving forward, have a list of emergency responses stuck to the inside of a kitchen door!

Thank you. I clarified with insurance, as we do not have emergency cover they will not pay for the plumber. I will get a third quote and will seek that we split the cost of repairs. 

subjecttocontract

How generous considering you have no liability. I hope your neighbours landlord shows his appreciation of your charity.

ThisIsWeird

subjecttocontract said:

How generous considering you have no liability. I hope your neighbours landlord shows his appreciation of your charity.

From what I understand, the OP has a 50:50 'liability' as there are only two properties in the building, for which they also have the Freehold. So, regardless of how this is resolved - insurance or pocket - it should be half'n'half.

ThisIsWeird

pred02 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

pred02 said:

Is there any reason why I can't now claim on the £300 to locate and repair the leak on insurance, let the owner downstairs deal with tenants and builders and pay my half of the excess?
There is no emergency number on the policy or anything that requires to use the insurance services. I guess I can call the insurance to find out if they will cover the amount I spent.
Ok so freeholders pay up which is up meaning 50/50 on the excess. 

I really don't know, but suspect it'll be too complicated for the insurance co. I'd suggest they either handle the whole claim, or nothing. I'm sure they'll think it great that you found an emergency plumber, and that it 'only' cost £300, but if they then need to juggle two separate claims - the first to refund your £300, and then the other party to make good the rest - it just becomes too complicated; they don't work that way. 

But you won't know unless you ask - I see no harm is calling them up and explaining the situation; you had a leak in the middle of the night, called out an emerg plumber, they fixed it, you paid them, but fear you now need to make a claim for the 'making good'; will they cover the first bill too?

You are both 'directors' of the Freehold company, yes? Then you should work together on this. I suspect that if you'd contacted the insurance co at the start, they'd have sent out an emergency plumber, and then an assessor to check on the damage. If the assessor found only a damp ceiling as shown in your pic, but otherwise intact, I imagine they'd perhaps provide a dehumidifier (but possibly not), and then suggest leaving it for a few days to fully dry, whereupon they'll arrange for a P&D.

But, I don't know. Perhaps they just go in and redo it all - but that's potentially a very messy job, and far more disruptive to the tenants.

All I would say for definite is, if the owner below is thinking that you will personally pay for a new ceiling, you need to disabuse him of his presumption right away - that just ain't going to happen. So, it's either P&D - for which you should both contribute equally - or he gets on with the insurance. For the latter, he should agree to submit your paid invoice for the plumbing repair too, and I'd like to think the insurance will cover it - but they may not. And they may not pay for a new ceiling either - not unless it's needed. So, the claim payment could be as little as £300 + £280, in which case you're both better off digging into your pockets for it.

If the insurance co won't pay for your plumbing repair, then the other owner should offer half towards this too - but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Remember - this was an unanticipated accident, and should be handled jointly. Not your fault. It is a joint responsibility.

Moving forward, have a list of emergency responses stuck to the inside of a kitchen door!

Thank you. I clarified with insurance, as we do not have emergency cover they will not pay for the plumber. I will get a third quote and will seek that we split the cost of repairs. 

Ok, so I got that completely wrong... :-(
Strikes me as being completely bizarre; they will cover 'trace & access' - the complex and costly task of potentially ripping up floors and stuff to locate the leak - but will then stand there pointing at it until you get a plumber in for what will almost certainly be a basic, one-hour call out charge? Wow. Nuts.
The total cost of resolving this issue should be borne fifty-fifty.
I'd suggest, for what is probably a trivial additional premium, 'emergency' should be added going forwards? Usually only around £25 - if not already included - in most 'detached' policies, so surely cannot be much more for your setup?
Good luck resolving this - I hope your fellow FH is sensible. Please update us.

subjecttocontract

ThisIsWeird said:

subjecttocontract said:

How generous considering you have no liability. I hope your neighbours landlord shows his appreciation of your charity.

From what I understand, the OP has a 50:50 'liability' as there are only two properties in the building, for which they also have the Freehold. So, regardless of how this is resolved - insurance or pocket - it should be half'n'half.

No it shouldnt......We seem to be going around in circles. The OP hasn't been negligent, so he has no liability to pay for, organise or get involved with the ground floor flat damage. It was caused by a leak that could not have been foreseen and gravity did the rest. How the ground floor decide to repair is up to them. The OP is not liable for cost, insurance excess or work to fix it. If they decide to claim on the insurance and the premium rises then that is what will happen.