Insurance has rejected claim

[ripperuk]

hi there,

i know that this section is not about insurance claims, but the claim is about central heating, so i'm in need of advice on behalf of my friend. The scenario is:-

He has recently placed a claim on his building insurance that his ceiling has had water damage due to one of the central heating pipes on the floor above leaking. The problem is that the insurance have rejected his claim saying that its not possible for the central heating which has been installed ONLY about a year ago to suddenly leak and that he must have deliberately loosen a "compression joint".

He denies this and even he is baffled as this central heating has really given no problems since it was installed and suddenly overnight it like let out a whole load of water onto the ceiling. When he woke up in the morning, he found water dripping and the ceiling sagging and large chunks of old plaster had dropped. He reported to the insurance, who said that the earliest they can send someone out to repair the central heating is approx 2-3wks!! He told them that the kids need the heating and that he will call his own repairman, to which they agreed.

After the repair was done, a guy came out to inspect the ceiling and then after a few days he got a call from them asking my mate what kind of repair was done. He said that he was not sure, but he had an invoice showing the repairs and he sent that to them. After a few more days, they rang him saying that the repairman was not corgi registered and also he clearly stated that some "compression joint" was loose and that he simply tightened it.

This is the cause of the leak and they said that being a reasonably new system it should have not leaked unless someone deliberately sabotaged it. They have voided the claim.

What can he do? What are his chances of doing anything? What could have caused the leak?

thanks for your help!

 

[Rob]

I would have thought that an older system would be less likely to all of a sudden have a loose fitting.

It was probably always loose and held together with whatever jointing paste which has eventually dried out.

Cant see them getting away with it. Whats the point of insuring the pipework if they think its impossible for it to fail.

 

[ripperuk]

thanks for your fast reply rob.

the problem is that his pipework is not old, but its just over 12months old, so their arguement is that this is new and should not have leaked suddenly.

 

[twgas]

the insurance company must be wrong. pipes, joints, boilers, tanks, in fact anything can leak, bet they wouldnt refuse to take the money "because its too new"

 

[wms]

Question as to why they say corgi reg to repair heating pipe.? this is incorrect corgi for gas yes. From previous experience insurance companies do not cover for the leak only the damage caused by it. unless its specifically for your water pipes etc. ie the crap the water board and several other companies send out . If it is a specific policy for pipe work, challenge them ask them to prove sabotage or pay up .if they refuse to co-operate ask them for the name of their regulatory body telling them you believe you have been mis sold a policy. that may shift their backsides. Keep a record of all previous and future conversations names dates etc.

 

[clf-gas]

This is the cause of the leak and they said that being a reasonably new system it should have not leaked unless someone deliberately sabotaged it. They have voided the claim.

Typical of insurers trying it on.

What can he do? What are his chances of doing anything?

Speak to the insurer and advise them not happy with ther responce and intend to take it up with insurance ombudsman.

What could have caused the leak?

If it is on a compression joint then it was not tightened properly and the expasion and contraction has opened the joint allowing it to leak.

the problem is that his pipework is not old, but its just over 12months old, so their arguement is that this is new and should not have leaked suddenly.

It has got nowt to do with pipework being twelve month old, building and contents is to cover against unforseen events. Tell your friend to spea with the ombudsman.

 

[solo]

In my experience with insurance companies the cause of the leak and it's subsequent repair usually becomes the responsibility of the homeowner. We all know that joints and fittings can fail at anytime for whatever reason. After the cause of the leak has been sorted, it then falls to the insurance company to repair the damage.

 

[ripperuk]

well thanks very much guys. He will be taking it up with the insurance again and lets hope they will listen to him this time round.

Lastly does the central heating repairman have to be corgi-registered? especially when the leak is the central heating water pipe?

 

[doitall]

Never heard anything so pathetic in 49 years.

No he doesn't need to be corgi registered, and compression fitting fail, I have seen end feed fitting that have not been soldered fall apart several years later when the system has been worked on

 

[kirkgas]

an article in this months Gas Installer Mag (which got delivered today) has an article on what CORGI deem "gaswork" and it specifically quotes an example of a non-CORGI guy being allowed to work on the wet side of a heating system but not the gas or flue etc. so get your friend to demand something in writing that expressly contradictes a CORGI statement (CORGI being the regulatory body for gas under the HSE) i know gas guys will now come on and slag CORGI off but in this instance we can use their statement to back up what we know is bullsh1t from the insurance, even if the pipe was one day old and for whatever reason you could not get the installer to fix it under their warranty/guarantee your insurance company would simply tell you they would pay for all exploratory work to investigate the leak, the damage caused by the leak BUT NOT the actual repair to the leak.

 

[Agile]

I am aware that SOME insurance companies will only allow repairs to a central heating system by someone who is CORGI registered EVEN if all the work is to wet parts.

Its their perogative but not a legal requirement. But they cannot require that only a female plumber or only a black plumber do the work.

Tony

 

[ripperuk]

many thanks for your advice.

Just one more thing. He's insured with Liverpool Victoria. I'm no expert, but a quick look at their policy documents, it states that the person is covered for any pipe damage, including accidental:-

http://www.lv.com/insurance/home_insurance/policy_information

So if you take a look at the documents, is he covered according to the policy terms and conditions?

 

[big-all]

seems to me that they don't believe your freind

why not go the line of suggesting"
if they think this is a fraudulent claim then please get the police involved if not pay up!!!

i wonder if they use that software that is supposed to recognses dishonest claiments over the phone!!!

 

[2scoops0406]

It is also worth bearing in mind that it is your central heating system, not theirs, so the insurance company cannot prevent you doing anything to it (whether or not that voids your insurance is a different matter). If the insurance comapny state that the repairer must br corgi registered, when this is not a legal requirement, it could be easily argued that this is an unfair condition on the insurance policy, and that by getting the repair facilitated ASAP, you have mitigated the insurance companies liability. Apart from that assuming that the damage is covered under the policy, the insurance is talking out of it's derriere. It's like a breakdown company saying, no sir, we can't recover your new car, new cars don't break down unless they've been sabotaged, utter piffle.

 

[billy bob]

They have no right to stipulate that repairs to pipework be carried out by a Corgi registered installer, all Corgi registration implies is the installer is competent to work on gas.
Insurance companies will always try it on, as has been suggested ask them to prove sabbotage or pay up, also state that you find their comments offensive and slanderous, as they are suggesting your friend is making a fraudulant claim.