One of our shops was flooded with rainwater coming through the roof. Building insurance is covered by landlord, contents by ourself. Landlords loss adjuster arranged for repairs and our loss adjuster authorised new carpet and some other bits and bobs once the roof repairs were completed.
We had the shop reopened one day with the new carpet down when the same thing happened again. Loss adjusters have said this will need to be a new claim and as our excess is £500 then it might not be worth it.
However it turned out that the cause of the flood was actually a Fruit Shoot bottle jammed in the rainwater pipe which meant the water was backing all the way back up to the roof and then pouring out and flooding in our shop.
So where do we stand with this as it would appear that the first repairs were not done correctly thus leading to the second flood? Meanwhile shop is still closed so we will need to be claiming on our business interruption insurance as well.
|
Was the fruit shoot bottle the cause of both floods?
Was the pipe with the bottle part of the first repair?
What was the [assumed] reason for the first flood?
|
If a builder went on the roof the first time and didn't spot or remove the bottle, the insurance company may have grounds for a claim against its own builder, surely?
Really spectacular incompetence, not working out the cause of the first flood and effecting the simple cure.
Insurance companies and their assessors always seem to me to throw huge sums of money about like drunken sailors on Saturday night, except when I try to make a claim myself of course. It's a mysterious business to me.
|
Our building has a flat roof and the water drains down through an old cast iron pipe from the roof, through the shop out to the street somewhere.
The flooding happened when the water was pouring "through the roof", from the inside you could see the water pouring through where the pipe went up into the roofspace. Builder said that the reason was one of the neighbouring shops downpipe was blocked therefore all the rainwater was coming down ours and it couldn't cope. My argument at that time was that surely this would just mean that the water wouldn't drain away from the roof as quickly rather than it being able to "burst its way" through a sealed pipe.
Builder claimed that he had fixed it and indeed we had a couple of days of very little rain and none came into the shop. Now what he did to fix this I don't know and I will be asking that question specifically. Then last week we had more rain and the place was flooded.
It was at this point the builder got plumbers with rods and they found a blockage in the pipe. This has then been cut out and the fruit shoot bottle found. So what has actually been happening is the rain has been coming down the pipe, hitting the blockage and then just backfilling all the way back up the pipe until it poured out at the top - not as originally thought from the rain coming through the roof but actually the water coming back up the pipe and out at the top.
Can we say for certain the fruit shoot bottle was always there - probably not but its a hell of a coincidence
|
When why or how the bottle arrived is irrelevant. Isn't it simply a matter of claiming (and if unpaid, suing for) your uninsured losses against the landlord?
Uninsured losses include your excess.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 2 Feb 15 at 09:29
|
I agree. The Landlord or his agent have failed to find and repair the original cause of flooding and allowed it to re-occur thus causing damage to your property. Write a letter to the Landlord stating that you hold him fully liable for the damage to your property and that if he does not intend to settle the matter directly he should pass your letter to his insurers.
|
We have been advised that we cannot claim for uninsured losses as we would need to prove there was negligence on the part of the landlord.
"Given the storm conditions experienced together with excessive rainfall which resulted in damage to many properties, it would be very difficult to prove that the landlord caused the incident due to a failure to maintain the property"
Also, there is also a clause within the lease contract that excludes liability for water ingress.
|
>> However it turned out that the cause of the flood was actually a Fruit Shoot
>> bottle jammed in the rainwater pipe which meant the water was backing all the way
>> back up to the roof and then pouring out and flooding in our shop.
>>
>> So where do we stand with this as it would appear that the first repairs
>> were not done correctly thus leading to the second flood?
How do you know when the Fruit Shoot bottle arrived?
|
Update - the buildings insurance loss adjuster has now confirmed to me that they will treat this as the one claim with the bottle being the cause of the problem.
I now need to work on our own contents loss adjustor.
|
Insurance claims - No FM2R
