Leak Trace my responsibility? Not covered on insurance because "no damage"?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Leak Trace my responsibility? Not covered on insurance because "no damage"?

    My hot water cylinder header tank float valve wasn't working properly, and subsequently water was overflowing into the overflow pipe which we discovered itself also had a problem.

    The flat downstairs was getting water ingress from 'somewhere', no-one could figure out where. A plumber was called in by the Management company, but he actually failed to find the cause of the problem. The Management company then sent their own surveyor in, and he discovered the problem. It seems that the overflow pipe which comes from the hot water header tank has a crack in it, as even though water was overflowing into it, it wasn't coming out the end, but leaking into the concrete floor under which it is buried. It is a plastic pipe, and the general consensus of opinion is that at some point in time, there has been movement which has either cracked the pipe or broken a join, or something... whatever the cause, it leaks somewhere under the floor. I wasn't aware of the problem with the float valve as of course, there was no visible overflow I could see.

    I organised and paid a plumber to come and fix the source of the overflow (my float valve) which of course stopped the flow, and the water ingress.

    I was told by the surveyor at the time, that tracing a leak is covered under the buildings insurance, and if the pipe needed changing, it would only be the cost of the pipe I would be liable for, a few quid for a few metres of plastic pipe and any building work etc (i.e digging up my floor to replace the pipe) would be covered.

    I have now received a bill from the Management company for the initial call-out by the plumber to trace the leak (which as mentioned he didn't find). I queried this, and have been told that I am liable because there was no damage to the flat downstairs and subsequently no insurance claim can be made.

    The overflow pipe runs through a structural concrete floor over which I have no control, but it is a solitary pipe that services my flat alone. My Lease states I am not responsible for structural floors, only mentioning vertical walls (which I presume would cover re-plastering etc?). As the damage can only really have occurred through movement of the building, or floor, or could have even been down to poor workmanship at the time of installation, can I be held liable for the costs incurred as a result of the failed pipe?

    Another point that concerns me, is that is the building under insured? If the plumber had put in a bill for £1000 instead of £100, then I would be put in a very difficult financial position.

    Whilst I fully agree and accept that the overflow was my problem, is the water ingress as the pipe is completely out of my control (as opposed to visible pipes in the property).

    Now, ordinarily I would just pay up out of courtesy and goodwill, as clearly the problem stemmed from my flat, but the Management company are just awful to deal with. Rude, don't answer queries, I was almost accused of lying over something which was no more than a misunderstanding and they seem to forget that they are employed by the Residents Association who pay for their services, not the other way round! Another story, I won't start on that one...

    So, am I undoubtedly (and without question) liable for the cost of the initial plumber because there was no damage to the flat below, so no claim can be made, or is this a grey area and the management company are simply expecting me to cough up without questioning my liability? Or should the cost of the plumber be equally spread across the service charges the residents pay?

    They want everything to be above board and correct, and so do I. It's only fair and proper.

    Thank you in advance.

    I think you have correctly come to the same view as me that it is down to you.


    Latest Activity


    • Another 'Flood from Above' Question
      I own a lower ground floor flat. Back in January I noticed water leaking down a wall from the ceiling in my kitchen. I went upstairs and showed the ground floor residents (GFR) the problem and recommended find the source and get the issue rectified. At this stage the damage to my wall was negligible....
      24-05-2018, 16:27 PM
    • Reply to Another 'Flood from Above' Question
      I wouldn't. I suspect winning on the other matters will be satisfaction enough. You don't want to put the judge offside by seeming greedy. They can be sanctimonious so&so's....
      24-05-2018, 18:29 PM
    • Reply to Another 'Flood from Above' Question
      Many thanks for the reply.

      To me it is a clear cut case of negligence, not only that they were told repeatedly that there was a leak coming from their property that needed fixing, but also when the pipe did finally crack completely they'd gone out leaving the tap running (for 2 hours)....
      24-05-2018, 17:08 PM
    • Reply to Another 'Flood from Above' Question
      Sorry to hear about your problems. People can be such f***wits. Yeah, reject upstairs' offers to decorate. Sue them for the excess. Regarding the laminate, that will just be extra to add to your decorating claim, won't it?
      24-05-2018, 16:48 PM
    • Home Insurance
      I claimed against my landlord insurance Sept 17. The specialist BTL Insurer settled for £950.00. Landlord insurance paid Jan 2018, with slight increase Jan 2018.
      I am currently renewing my own household insurance with a high St bank and have been advised that ANY claim needs to be reported (even...
      23-05-2018, 08:10 AM
    • Reply to Home Insurance
      This is exactly why you don't make minor claims on insurance policies - and I am afraid £950 is a minor claim. Rather pay lower premium and go for the highest excesses possible. One way or the other you will end up paying the £950 -- or more.
      23-05-2018, 13:47 PM
    • Reply to Home Insurance
      Try broker or other insurers: Different insurers have different rules & processes..

      Suspect their increase could be challenged on the basis that it is "unfair" but I'd not want to get onto any insurance company(s) black-list...
      23-05-2018, 10:42 AM
    • Landlords buildings insurance- what to look for
      Lots on
      I need to insure a rental house. It is occupied by a family on an AST,it has a standard 1960s construction. I need to cover against any damage ( fire, water etc), public liability insurance, is there anything else I should be including?
      Are any companies particularly good/ not so good? Thank ...
      22-05-2018, 10:38 AM
    • Reply to Landlords buildings insurance- what to look for
      Lots on
      Thank you everyone. In the household only 1 person works, the spouse does not but they have a daughter who is at school. And another whom I understand has left home but comes over to stay regularly. I would need public liability and buildings insurance but can’t really think of anything else I need....
      22-05-2018, 18:47 PM
    • Reply to Landlords buildings insurance- what to look for
      Beware of some ludicrous T&C's -- for example many policies exclude students. You may not think of your 35 year old wife of your tenant doing a PhD as a student, until your claims get declined. Read carefully, and bear in mind that if your tenants change during an insurance period you may be left...
      22-05-2018, 13:28 PM