Claiming off house insurance for contractor's mistake

Jumblebumble

Gedd said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

What's the point in having insurance if you're not going to use it?  Your insurance company will pay for the faulty connection to be sorted out properly and will quantify and sort out the damage.  You may not lose any NCD if your insurer fully recovers their costs from his insurer, and NCD on home insurance is not typically substantial anyway.

The alternative is you having to do a lot of chasing for quotes and taking him to court, which will take months, possibly a year.

My insurance have said it will count as a claim against me, and I will pay a higher policy next year - no matter if they recovered costs.

If he admitted fault and claimed off his insurance, or just paid for the damage, there would be no financial implications for me. If I had caused the damage I doubt I would have claimed for the same reason.

I already have quotes to do the repairs and would be happy to have the damaged repaired while I wait for a court to decide who foots the bill - if it came to that.

Your insurance may well put up the cost next time around regardless of who you claim from when you tell them about the incident so it is incorrect to say categorically that there are no financial implications.
The no claims bonus will be reinstated  to you if your insurance company recovery their outlay from his insurance.

inthesticks

The plumber should have had Public Liability in place, and you could have claimed on that. If he hasn't got that insurance in place I would be concerned about the quality of his work as most traders would have it in place. No need not to have this type of insurance in place as it is relatively cheap.

Alderbank

inthesticks said:

The plumber should have had Public Liability in place, and you could have claimed on that. If he hasn't got that insurance in place I would be concerned about the quality of his work as most traders would have it in place. No need not to have this type of insurance in place as it is relatively cheap.

The plumber has PLI. He has asked the OP not to claim on it.

born_again

inthesticks said:

The plumber should have had Public Liability in place, and you could have claimed on that. If he hasn't got that insurance in place I would be concerned about the quality of his work as most traders would have it in place. No need not to have this type of insurance in place as it is relatively cheap.

Would public liability ins cover his lack of resolving a issue?

MyRealNameToo

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Gedd said:

Alderbank said:

Gedd said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

What's the point in having insurance if you're not going to use it?  Your insurance company will pay for the faulty connection to be sorted out properly and will quantify and sort out the damage.  You may not lose any NCD if your insurer fully recovers their costs from his insurer, and NCD on home insurance is not typically substantial anyway.

The alternative is you having to do a lot of chasing for quotes and taking him to court, which will take months, possibly a year.

My insurance have said it will count as a claim against me, and I will pay a higher policy next year - no matter if they recovered costs.

I already have quotes to do the repairs and would be happy to have the damaged repaired while I wait for a court to decide who foots the bill - if it came to that.

Sounds like the call handler at your insurers was just trying to fob you off. How much more will you pay as a direct result of the claim? Probably all their renewing customers will pay a higher premium next year!

I ask because if you take it to court the court will expect you to have taken all reasonable steps to minimise your loss. The usual way of doing that is to claim on your insurance then claim your uninsured loss, which will be any excess in your policy plus that quantified premium resulting from your claim.

In fact, when you tell the plumber your actual loss, which is the amount you can sue him for, is a total of say £200 excess plus perhaps £25 insurance premium increase he might decide to just settle for that amount.

That would be a good result all round.

It's about £1300 materials and labour...

I think you misunderstood the point Alderbank is making.  They're suggesting your direct court claim from the plumber is your out of pocket costs after you've made an insurance claim, which would be the aggregate of any excess you paid plus what the increase in your premium might cost you over the following five years (which is sometimes the period over which a prior claim is considered).

In other words, you claim on your insurance, they make the repairs (which will almost certainly cost them less than £1300) and you recover any other expense from the plumber, the effect of which is that you're back in the position you would have been in had the leak not occurred, from a property condition and financial point of view.

Whatever you do dont do this without speaking to your insurers first!

Legally you and your insurers can only go after the third party or their insurers once. If you litigate for your excess and dont include your insurers outlay then you will be blocking your insurers from recovery and therefore making it a "fault" claim and also in most cases breaching the terms of your insurance by preducing their position. 

Now insurers dont want to go to court generally and certainly dont want it to go into a higher track and so often if given forewarning the two insurers will agree not to include their outlay but honour the outcome of the court action but no insurer is going to be stupid enough to retrospectively agree to such a thing when a daft policyholder has meant they have ceased to be liable for the majority of the costs. 

Gedd said:
I had a plumber fit a new heating system last year and now one of the joints he fitted has failed and caused a lot of damage. Although he has admitted using the incorrect type of fittings (against manufacturer’s instructions) he is denying responsibility – because he’s always done it that way. I have proof he used the wrong fittings and of him admitting it.

He wants me to claim off my house insurance, and they can contact his insurance company if hey want.

If I claim off my own house insurance, it will count against me and I will lose my no claims discount. Which means I will still be worse off.

 Do I have any options other than small claims court?

If you tell your insurers that it's due to defective workmanship they may simply decline the claim. As its an escape of water claim its a bit more dependent on exactly the wording of your policy as EoW is a bit different to many other perils given the cause of the escape of water isnt covered anyway (unless you put a nail through a pipe etc) but its the resultant damage that is covered. 

Clearly if you want them to pursue the plumber for their outlay you'll have to tell them work was just done on the pipe but it may result in a decline. If you dont tell them and they dont spot its fresh work then more likely they'll pay out but then they won't be attempting recovery. 


Whether you claim or not you have still sustained a "loss" and so it will be declarable to your insurers at renewal anyway.