Roof leak: potential second insurance claim for the same problem?

[dejavous]

In the storms a few winters back I had some damage to my roof and water was coming in. Insurance company was slammed with claims and gave me the go ahead to get it sorted myself if I could get it done faster and re-imburse the cost. All good or so I thought.

The obvious issue, damaged tiles, valley and flashing was apparently repaired and no water was coming into the ceiling of the bathroom but I now suspect that the water is still getting into the wall somewhere. It's an old Victorian house, I was replacing an internal door frame tonight and when taking it out discovered it was wet up against the bricks and starting to go soft. So I did some checking and it appears that plaster has blown in some places on the walls going down 2 floors underneath the original leak. On the wall in the room directly inside the rear extension where the roof butts up against the wall the plaster is turning to powder, the only thing holding it in is the lining paper!

I checked the attic and can't see an obvious leak, I think it might be the just below the valley and getting into the wall there but I'm no expert. This is probably going to be far more costly to put right, with damage to the plaster in 3 rooms...

Advice is welcome, will my insurance cover another claim for potentially the same issue?

 

[securespark]

I guess the plaster issue is historic, ie pertaining to the original leak but not noticed by the repairers?

Make an enquiry with the ins. co. to see what the lie of the land is.

As for the damp, you can mention that too. The danger is (for both issues) is that they wash their hands of it.

In which case, you may need to pay for an independent inspection.

 

[alan333]

I read something a while ago about insurance claims etc (probably on here). Apparently getting the go ahead to get your own repairs passes the buck to you, where if you leave it to the insurance company it's on them. ie they won't pay out again since you were happy that the repair had been done to your satisfaction earlier.

 

[dejavous]

Thanks for the replies.

I guess the plaster issue is historic, ie pertaining to the original leak but not noticed by the repairers?

Possibly, I'm not sure. Even if there is no leak (unlikely I feel) and the plaster issue is down to the previous ingress the damage is as a result of the storm damage and so claimable?

Alternatively if water is still getting in as a result of the repair being incomplete that would be the cause of the plaster problem. And if that is the case then would that not be claimable as the damage wasn't correctly repaired?

I read something a while ago about insurance claims etc (probably on here). Apparently getting the go ahead to get your own repairs passes the buck to you, where if you leave it to the insurance company it's on them. ie they won't pay out again since you were happy that the repair had been done to your satisfaction earlier.

I hope that is not the case, when I called with the problem the insurers suggested that they were slammed and I could be waiting up to two weeks to get assessed let alone repaired and if I could do it quicker privately then to go ahead.


There was no problem before the original leak so it's not a lack of maintenance. I'd only bought 12 months earlier and the details survey didn't indicate any issues on the roof. I think I'm clutching at straws but I've just been bled nearly dry for new gas supply and boiler.

 

[conny]

If the original damage occurred a few years ago why not put in a fresh claim for recent damage?
If you say it is from the original repair they are more likely to refuse to pay out again and tell you to claim off the builder.

 

[securespark]

That might be an issue if the insco smell a rat when they look at it and find the plaster damage historic, not current (ie dried out) and suspect fraud.

 

[KenGMac]

dejavous, hi.

Several points in no order of importance
1/. An insurer is over the moon when a Policy Holder accepts a cash settlement, why because, the insurer does not have to pay VAT! also if the claim is handled in-house by the insurer the insurer will incur a much higher cost to repair than if the Policy holder does the work himself. And the insurer does not have to tie up staff in organising a builder on the Insurers approved lists of Contractors to undertake the repair, no vetting of the insurance companies Builders costs, no final accounts and no Policy holder calling in the make a complaint, in all a Cash Settlement to an Insures is a win, win for the INSURER!

2/. If your last claim was several years ago then it is not unreasonable to have a second failure of the roof in the intervening time, your problem is going to be answering the 64,000$ question? when did the claimed for event actually occur? why the emphasis on this? Simple, all Insurers have access to a Computerised system called "Weather-Net" that tracks Via weather stations, all the way around the Country, wind speed, Direction, rain fall Etc. Why is this of interest? simple you as the "Claimant" need to prove to the Insurer that the wind speed on the date you are going to make a claim for exceeded [as far as almost all insurers are concerned] 55 MPH, Weather net records go back forever and are logged at a frequency of about 4 Hours, sometimes a shorter time frame is available.

3/. If you had have gone with the Insurers Contractor, different scenario, that is the Insurance Companies Contractor MUST provide a 1 Year "guarantee period" different if the insured uses his / her "Own Contractor" in this latter scenario the Insured is effectively on their own. But if you think about things, if the insurer is in effect offering only a one year guarantee on workmanship, and your claim occurred more than one year ago? think about it?

4/. If you choose a date when there was little or no wind then the claim you are about to intimate will fail at the first hurdle, but, and this is a big but, if you have been totally un-aware of the present roof leak, things like inaccessibility to where the leak is occurring, the classic is under a bath where the Policy holder simply can not see a leak, especially on a ground floor.

Ken