Who pays, installer or household insurance?

It seems that none of you have had much experience of insurance companies.

I have often done repairs for householders and a few insurance firms and I have NEVER heard of a single one chasing the plumber.

One was a second cistern added in the loft with the overflow being moved to the new cistern leaving an open but LOWER hole in the original cistern.

The float valve jammed overnight and about 600 litres poured out bringing down two ceilings and ruining suites and TVs etc.

My charge of £48 to replace the float valve was minute compared with Damage Control who put all the furnishings and carpets in the front garden. I gather total claim was £4K-£8K but no interest in the stupid plumber.

Another plumber used a pushfit and I had to replace a 1 y.o. boiler wetted by the flood when it came off.

I only use copper!!!

Tony
 
Sponsored Links
Agile said:
It seems that none of you have had much experience of insurance companies.
Ha ha ha ha ha.

I only use copper!!!
Pushfit is a type of fitting; copper is a material used for tubing. :rolleyes:

You don't use brass compression or soldered fittings then?
 
Agile wrote:
It seems that none of you have had much experience of insurance companies.
Softus wrote
Ha ha ha ha ha.

Thanks Tony. Rather what I expected, for smallish claims at least.
Experiences are what I'm asking about - not how to progress a claim against a plumber. Softus have you exp of ins cos going after a plumber?

By the sound of things, this was a compression joint.

We've all seen unmade connections last for years. How long is a plumber liable for? A day, a month, a year, 2 years? Do clauses in contracts make any difference? Does some vague idea of reasonableness override? I doubt the latter.
 
ChrisR said:
Softus have you exp of ins cos going after a plumber?
Never seen it happen. I didn't mean to imply that I had - I was mocking because of the all-too-familiar pomposity of Agile's post.

I've seen an insurance company pursue an uninsured car driver for money, but that was in a case where the fault was not disputed. The injured party also pursued, by proxy, for personal injury, but failed to make a court application in time, therefore that element of the claim fell apart.

By the sound of things, this was a compression joint.
I would expect so, but it would be nice to know exactly what it was and why it popped off, especially if it was a tank-fed service.

We've all seen unmade connections last for years. How long is a plumber liable for? A day, a month, a year, 2 years? Do clauses in contracts make any difference? Does some vague idea of reasonableness override? I doubt the latter.
Reasonableness does become important.

It's important to separate out the questions bound up in all of this:

1. How long do you have to discover that a fault exists?
2. How do you determine fault?
3. How long is a person liable for something that is clearly their fault?
4. How long do you have to make a claim?

If a compression joint leaked one day after being made, the plumber left an invoice and isn't fly-by-night, has insurance, and the customer notified him immediately, but he denied liability, and was taken to court within six years, then I would expect the plumber to be be held liable.

However, determining fault is not always straightforward, which, IMHO, is the reason that insurance companies don't pursue plumbers. It's doubly difficult when the evidence has been removed in order to fix the leak quickly.

To complicate it further, a latent fault may lie undiscovered for years, then suddenly leak. This makes it harder, commercially, to point the finger, even though, morally, it's clear who's at fault.

In a case where the plumber fesses up, whether or not he has insurance, he is without doubt liable for the damage resulting from a failure to use reasonable care and skill. You can't contract out of your statutory liability.

Human error is permitted, but a reasonably careful and skillful plumber will always test his work in order discover his errors. Who would dream of turning on the mains and walking away without checking all new joints?

If you believe that the plumber is liable, and if he has been told, but has refused to pay up, then you have a statutory right to apply to a court for a period of up to six years. If remedy for personal injury is being sought then the period is three years. However, delaying unnecessarily, i.e. without good reason, whilst not affecting your rights, can weaken your case, because judging on a disputed claim is all about the balance of probabilities, and courage of conviction is a factor in judging credibility.

If I were the plumber, then I'd make sure of having insurance. I suppose I'd also offer to work off the debt rather than pay the money.

If I were an ordinary punter I would claim from my own insurance company and then claim my uninsured losses, including the policy excess, from the plumber. I would tell him up front that this is what I'm doing. If the insurance company wants to pursue him for the rest, then that's up to them.

You have the option to just inform your own insurance company and proceed directly to court against the plumber. The problem there is that you have to stand the cost of repairs while the case is settled, and the risk is that you could lose the case, and in the meantime lose the ability to claim on your own insurance.
 
Sponsored Links
ollski said:
but what I mean is, if say a speedfit fitting lost its grip on the pipe and was forced off yet had been installed correctly that has nothing to do with the installer. Ok he can repair it for goodwill, but I can't see how that is not a house insurance claim for the damage and the maybe installers responsibility to repair the system defect

i would have though if the plumber bought the pushfit then the contract was between the plumber and pushfit with the householder being the innocent "dammaged" party with the plumber bearing the responcibility for for repair!!!!!!
 
big-all said:
ollski said:
but what I mean is, if say a speedfit fitting lost its grip on the pipe and was forced off yet had been installed correctly that has nothing to do with the installer. Ok he can repair it for goodwill, but I can't see how that is not a house insurance claim for the damage and the maybe installers responsibility to repair the system defect

i would have though if the plumber bought the pushfit then the contract was between the plumber and pushfit with the householder being the innocent "dammaged" party with the plumber bearing the responcibility for for repair!!!!!!

Possibly but I would think that when the householder bought the fitting off the plumber it then became their responsibility.
As far as I know the house insurance companies are perfectly entitled to try to reclaim the losses but they won't bother as it costs too much unless the damage runs into 10s of thousands.
 
ollski said:
...Possibly but I would think that when the householder bought the fitting off the plumber it then became their responsibility...
I don't think so, I think the plumber has contracted to supply and fit, with proper skill.

It could be the housholders responsibility if he insisted on buying or specifying inferior fitttings, but not if the plumber selected and supplied his own choice.
 
ollski said:
Possibly but I would think that when the householder bought the fitting off the plumber it then became their responsibility.
As far as I know the house insurance companies are perfectly entitled to try to reclaim the losses but they won't bother as it costs too much unless the damage runs into 10s of thousands.

now that would be a cowboys charter :D :D :D

i install a new front door with a plastic and pvc 5 lever lock as long as it lasts till i get the money i am ok cos its no longer my problem ;)
 
wouldn`t this be an idea situation for these insurance backed warranties ! that they are trying to impose on us plumbers and notification .
 
This
http://www.dti.gov.uk/files/file25486.pdf
is relevant, but mostly applies to simple supply of goods.
See consequential losses, and "test of reasonableness", and "Exclusion Clauses".
No real guidance about duration of responsibility, though you will find:

"Indeed, goods might not conform to contract if they
failed to work later, even after a number of
years, due to an inherent fault – i.e. one that
could be said to exist at the time of sale."


What actually happens in real cases can of course be quite different.
 
GrahamT said:
I once had a speedfit endcap pop-off a mains cold pipe after 2 weeks. It had been put on properly but you could see from the grip marks where the cap had slowly worked it way off. My boss at the time put it down to a sudden surge in mains pressure.

Luckily it was on a building site and did v little damage. But I will now NEVER ever use a speedfit cap on anything other than a sealed system, even for one night
Thanks for that , Graham ...........I`ve got one in son`s flat was goint to get round to changing it ......... :rolleyes: You`ve galvanised me into action ;)
 
Softus said:-

"""However, determining fault is not always straightforward, which, IMHO, is the reason that insurance companies don't pursue plumbers. It's doubly difficult when the evidence has been removed in order to fix the leak quickly."""

My experience is that all insurance companies have the same rules and cover the consequential losses caused by damage from water leaks without ever chasing the plumber or even asking for a report. I assume the admin cost of that would not be worth the bother.

They all specifically do NOT cover putting right the plumbing fault which causes the leak which is why I often get called to do that at the cost of the householder.

Tony
 
Agile said:
My experience is that all insurance companies have the same rules...
I can believe that they all have the same goal of making a profit, but I can't help but doubt that you have experience of all insurance companies.

++++++++++++
Steady on, lads, don't pick at each other.

M R
++++++++++++
 
At the risk of stating the obvious, my experience is only of those insurance companies of which I have had experience. Of those "all"...

This afternoon I had another call. The insurance co will repair the pipe but we were called to remove the plasterboard ceiling to give access to the pipe.

We have quoted a price to remove the plasterboard ( £120 Sunday ) but that would usually include fixing the leak as well but the householder is adamant she wants the insurance contractor to fix the leak!

Tony
 
what about if a compotent plumber does all the necessary checks,then does a dry air test say 5 bar for 1 hour. all is ok, then one week later a joint fails. seen it happen to numerous plumbers,myself and probably you who are reading this. where would the plumber stand then. will it come a time when testing is signed off by insurance companys and more regulations blah blah blah are enforced.
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top