NEED ADVICE/TIPS - House Insurance Claim [Subsidence]

Ihopethisusernameisnttaken

Hi all,

For over a year, approaching 2 years now, been going through a claim via our House Insurance 'Crawford & Co' for subsidence. The house is sinking, cracks are forming everwhere inside and outside and contact has been minimal from them.

There first offer was worth 10k and we would have to source the work/builders ourselves. I said I wasnt happy with this offer, requesting we get underpinning done to reduce the risk of this happening again, I'm assuming this wouldnt be enough to cover the damage. (This is the 3rd time we have claimed for subsidence in 20 years and each time they just offer a botch job to remedy the situation)

So they sent some engineers every 3-6 months to monitor the house with some lasers and seeing whats the movement like, its now been 3 months since the last reading and the insurer is still awaiting the response from their consultant.

Whats the best way of handling/escalating this sitatuation to get the desired outcome as this has been going on for quite some time now and I have a sixth sense they will try to worm their way out of this.

Tia if any additional information is needed I'd be more than happy to fill in the blanks with pictures/responses/readings etc

winsand23

Hi Tia

Sorry you are going through this too. It's so terribly worrying.

Go to the Ombudsman and name your Insurer as well as Crawford.  Your contract is with your Insurer. Crawford offered me a little over £500 to self project and carry out the works on my subsidence, and provide them with a structural engineers report when works had finished, to say it had been completed satisfactorily.  I declined. Their costings? About 30K so far! It is shameless behaviour by both the Insurer and their Agent to try and do less than adequate repairs and offers of grossly inadequate monetary offers to carry out works. Look Crawford up on Trustpilot. Stick to your guns, and fight.  Your Insurer should see that your property is returned to you in good order and not with a shoddy repair.

Crawford have so far issued  my property with two certificates of adequacy and major works haven't even started on the repairs. I do hope MSE and the Ombudsman look into this Company. From the reviews I have read, there are a lot of very unhappy people out there, and the words I would use is sharp practice by Crawford with major Insurers being complicit of their behaviour.

Please write to the Ombudsman. It won't cost you anything, and it may just stop this sort of sharp practice in the future.  

Annemos

Just to add some more points.   

(I am not an Insurance Expert. But I had a claim that was going wrong at various points, including most of the points I mention in Point 3 below. I should also add, that mine was not with Crawfords.) 

1      The Financial Ombudsman Service are not Technical Experts. 

So when they are presented with a Complaint about the methods being used in a Subsidence Claim (stabilisation methods, the repairs themselves, including the quality of them etc)  .................the FOS wil, of course, be given the Reports provided by the Insurance Company (Loss Adjuster).     

However, to be able to go on and make any decision that might go in the Homeowner's Favour, the FOS will ALSO need to be provided with a Structural Engineering Report from the Homeowner. (Perhaps a Surveyor, if it is more about repairs rather than Structural Stability.) 

Only then can the FOS judge which Report seems to carry the most weight of evidence.

And if the Homeowner's Report is judged to be the version that should be implemented AND it is different from that of the Loss Adjuster's report, then the Homeowner can ask for their own Report to be reimbursed. 


2      One complains to the Loss Adjuster first and one must follow the timing rules. They have 8 weeks to reply. Once a Final Response Letter is received, or if nothing is received within 8 weeks, then one can take the Complaint to the Ombudsman. 

And then when one sends that Complaint to the Ombudsman, the Homeowner's Complaint is against the Actual Insurance Company. (Because the Insurance Company has ultimate responsibility for all those Companies working under Delegated Authority for that Insurance Company on any Insurance Claim, including Loss Adjusters and Claim Handlers.) 




3    Each Subsidence Case has its own facts. But here you can do a search on your own facts, to look at FOS decisions. This is an INVALUABLE, EXCELLENT resource for us. 


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


Topics to be found include:

a     "Subsidence Repairs are to repair Damage caused by Subsidence that has led to the Current Claim". They are NOT meant to be "Betterment" and they are also NOT intended to "Prevent Future Damage".   

BUT BUT BUT.... the repairs must be "Lasting and Effective". (Last for many years.) So, if something extra is required to be done, so that these current repairs will not fail, then the FOS might rule that those extra things must be done. 


b     Related to that, one can search for Cases about failures that have occurred to the same area of a home and which had not lasted for a reasonable length of time.  The Claim might need to be re-opened and re-assessed. 

c    Disputes about methods of Stabilisation. (Root Barriers, Tree Removal and Tree Maintenance, "is Underpinning necessary or can the Insurance Company try other methods first"   etc etc.)


d     That one's home should be put back into the position it was before the Subsidence happened. (Types of joint used in Repointing, brick types etc.) 


e      Cases about Claims that have been taking too long.  


f      Very Important to note that:   "During and after a Subsidence Claim, for future years, the home should be retained for insurance by the Insurer that handled the Claim".     This is called "Continuation of Cover".   (Cases about this include, being dropped by that Insurance Company, Unreasonable Premium Uplifts etc.)  


g    If things have gone very wrong and Costs have escalated. There is a big Insurance Database called the CUE (Claims and Underwriting Exchange). This can be used to set premiums. The FOS may rule that the Cost on the CUE should be set back to "The Cost the Claim would have cost, had it been done properly in the first place."

Also there are cases where 2 claims have been entered on the CUE and there is a dispute as to whether there was actually only One Claim. Or if a Claim has been characterised as Subsidence, when it should not have been.