esure home insurance - exclusion, exclusion, exclusion

unhappydriver

I agree that their cover looks competitive. Unfortunately I only read the reviews on their prices and didn't read reviews on how they handled claims. I took out home insurance with esure including accidental damage, 24-hour emergency cover, and all the usual protections — expecting to be covered for common household problems like leaks.

A leak appeared from the bathroom into my kitchen.  When I phoned them to enquire about the process, I was immediately told that a leaky pipe would be excluded as they would class that as wear and tear - which I think was meant to discourage me from progressing.  However when I got a plumber out to look at it, the damage was worse than anticipated and it turns out the bath had been poorly fitted by the previous owners, leading to leaks underneath the bath, behind the panel.  esure then denied the claim saying that the sealant had gone and that was excluded.  I submitted a report showing that it was down to the bath being poorly fitted, and not the sealant wearing away.   Esure then excluded it on the basis  of “poor workmanship”  and apparently they don't cover for that.  Just to note, I'd only moved in 2.5 months ago so this wasn't my poor workmanship - but even so, they don't cover for anything that was done previously.  Worse still, I wasn't given the opportunity to submit my complaint in writing until after it had already been passed to the complaints department, which I only discovered when I rang to check when a Manager would be calling me. I’ve since sent in a written complaint and I asked simply for a receipt to show this had been received.  I had to ask for this 3 times, and it was only when I posted a review that someone came back to me.  I am without a properly working bathroom and can’t carry out repairs without fear of invalidating my cover and they were aware of that.  They finally replied to say that even though they had kept changing the exclusions - and sorry for any confusion on that - they would only cover for leaks if it was sudden and unexpected and that it was down to me to maintain all sealants and inspect the equipment.  I have pointed out that I had only moved in 2.5 months ago, so realistically would not have had chance to replace all of this, and that the only way I could have inspected under the bath was to cut off the fitted bath panel.  The leak was sudden - it had just started coming through to my kitchen ceiling - which really cancels out their argument.

The exclusions are applied so strictly that it feels almost impossible to get support for real-world issues. I’ve since discovered that other insurers may still cover the resulting damage even where workmanship is excluded — but esure has taken no such approach.

Even if you are covered for accidental damage and leakage of water - check your exclusions. They exclude:- leaking / burst pipes - classing that as wear and tear. Leaking from taps that have been left running. Damage caused by any work being carried out. Floods. Sealant failure. And poor workmanship. I cannot see any way in which leaking of water would actually be covered. I urge others to read the fine print very carefully — and consider how the exclusions may leave you exposed when you need help the most. And don't just check your policy documents - poor workmanship was not on my policy document!  Check their general policy for the fine print.

 

DullGreyGuy

Wear & tear, poor workmanship, defective design and gradual processes (other than Subsidence) are standard exclusions on almost all Home insurance. Home insurance is designed to cover unexpected sudden events and isnt a substitute for proper home maintenance. 

Appreciate you just purchased the property but these are the joys of home ownership and why surveys, damp checks etc are all recommended before buying a property along with having a sink fund for the inevitable problems you find after buying. 

unhappydriver

DullGreyGuy said:

Wear & tear, poor workmanship, defective design and gradual processes (other than Subsidence) are standard exclusions on almost all Home insurance. Home insurance is designed to cover unexpected sudden events and isnt a substitute for proper home maintenance. 

Appreciate you just purchased the property but these are the joys of home ownership and why surveys, damp checks etc are all recommended before buying a property along with having a sink fund for the inevitable problems you find after buying. 

Their immediate response upon me first logging the claim was to say it was wear and tear and that would be excluded.  Even before a plumber looked at it.  When that was proved wrong, they said it was sealant.  When that was proved wrong, they said it was poor workmanship.  When I pointed out it wasn't my poor workmanship and that other insurance companies don't apply that exclusion as strictly - they then came back to say they would have covered me if it had been a sudden occurrence, and that it was down to me checking and maintaining my equipment and sealant.  I'd only lived there just over 2 months - so not quite had chance to do annual maintenance or cut the bath panel away to look under it... It may have happened previously for the previous owners and probably been repaired by them in the past, but it had suddenly just started leaking again.  They actually apologised that they kept changing what exclusion they could apply - and this was their final one.  Their surveyor has said it can be repaired without being ripped out - I've asked esure to confirm in writing that they accept their surveyors advice, so that if it suddenly starts leaking again I'll be covered.  Strangely enough, they don't appear to want to accept their surveyors advice - which leaves me in a predicament.   All of my funds went into buying the house so unfortunately no sink fund available.  It's my 4th house - never had problems like this before. 

DullGreyGuy

unhappydriver said:
When I pointed out it wasn't my poor workmanship and that other insurance companies don't apply that exclusion as strictly

Doesnt matter whose workmanship it is, in fact they are more likely to pay if it is yours. 

A quick search on the ombudsman website will show you other insurers do apply poor workmanship clauses. There are many declined claims for conservatories that were built with inappropriate foundations and so are sinking.