Scenario:
Decorations and furnishings were reported water damaged as a result of ‘secondary flooding’ from the recent flooding. Neighbours advised that water damage to the property was a result of floodwater ingress during the event, even though the property did not sugar any specific ingress. Moisture damage was evident on the ground and first floors. The policyholder reported the claim to insurers who appointed a local surveyor who agreed with the policyholder as to the cause of damage. A schedule of works including stripping out and reinstatement was presented to the insurance company.
Reason for contact:
The appointed Loss Adjuster was not convinced with the surveyors report given the time since the flooding.
Action:
A full investigative survey of the property was undertaken and it was clear that the damage was caused by condensation as a result of home improvements and internal activities. The policyholder had new PVC windows and doors installed 12 months after the initial flooding incident of 2007. They had not noticed damp or mould growth prior to having the new windows and doors installed. The rear door did not fit flush with the door frame which allowed the infiltration of moisture and rain.
The policyholder was using a tumble dryer in an upstairs bedroom without moisture extraction, windows also did not have “trickle” vents fitted and air brick covers had also been removed from the bedrooms and bathroom resulting in damage to the ceilings.
Outcome:
The Policyholder, Loss Adjuster and insurer were all satisfied with the independent inspection, survey and report.
Feedback:
The claim was repudiated due to damage caused by non-insurable events.
Cost of investigative report: £650
Cost saving to the insurance company: £37,000