Home subsidence+crack and insurance cover

P

polarbear

Registered User
Messages
41
The Loss adjustor told me the insurance company will underpin the foundation but will not undertake any "related work" occurring from the subsidence, i.e.repair of a deep crack. I can see from the inside of the room to the outside. I presume this to mean the crack itself and any interior redecorating will have to be done by me. As I am anxious for the subsidence to be taken care of at the earliest and I don't want to hold up the work (which the insurance company are contracting out to a company), I just wondered— if once the underpinning is done—filling the crack itself can easily be done by myself and that will be the extent of it? I am prepared to pay for minor repairs to expedite the work but as I am not a structural engineer, I have no idea if there will be more than just cosmetic repairs once the underpinning is done and if the cost of the "unrelated work" the insurance are refusing to cover (even though I am covered for this in my policy) will be minimal. I have seen videos of how underpinning is done. Seems, if done properly, the split wall could come together and I could end up with a hairline crack? Any builders out there who could throw some light on this before I accept any "deal" from the insurance company that will leave me out of pocket? How I love this forum - full of strangers who are really friends I just don't know :) Thanks to all......
PB
 
Last edited:
polarbear said:
The Loss adjustor told me the insurance company will underpin the foundation but will not undertake any "related work" occurring from the subsidence, i.e.repair of a deep crack. I can see from the inside of the room to the outside. I presume this to mean the crack itself and any interior redecorating will have to be done by me. As I am anxious for the subsidence to be taken care of at the earliest and I don't want to hold up the work (which the insurance company are contracting out to a company), I just wondered— if once the underpinning is done—filling the crack itself can easily be done by myself and that will be the extent of it? I am prepared to pay for minor repairs to expedite the work but as I am not a structural engineer, I have no idea if there will be more than just cosmetic repairs once the underpinning is done and if the cost of the "unrelated work" the insurance are refusing to cover (even though I am covered for this in my policy) will be minimal. I have seen videos of how underpinning is done. Seems, if done properly, the split wall could come together and I could end up with a hairline crack? Any builders out there who could throw some light on this before I accept any "deal" from the insurance company that will leave me out of pocket? How I love this forum - full of strangers who are really friends I just don't know :) Thanks to all......
PB
Click to expand...

This to me appears completely daft. You cant offer partial indemnity to a policy holder. An insurance company is either covering the item as an insured risk under the policy or they are not. I cannot see how they can carry out a repair and yet not cover the consequential damage of the incident. It all comes down to your policy wording, inclusions and exclusions but I cannot see how there would be an exclusion for the works you have outlined if they have accepted they will cover the subsidence repair
 
kkelliher - my thoughts exactly and I knew someone would point this out! My claim is a little more complex; I was trying to avoid a long post! Anyway to cut a long story short, because of an oil spill which happened at the beginning of this year close to where the subsidence has/is happening and (maybe a different loss assessor), underpinning of the foundation has to be carried out (by proxy one would say). I can see why the loss assessor is taking this line as the claim was for an oil spill. However as I was in the process of putting in a claim for subsidence. I am now not sure how to proceed. On the one hand I do not want to delay the underpinning and decontamination process but on the other hand I may find myself unable to claim for any "related costs" as subsidence will have been (seen) to be taken care of, be it in a round-about-kind of way. Although I am covered for subsidence, the insurance company are putting the onus on me to prove its an insurable risk, i.e. that it was not due to inadequate drainage and workmanship from the run off of water from a flat roof built 40 years ago (extension to a building erected in the 1900's). Engineers report says it may or may not be the reason - tests would have to be carried out but in the event there is no reason to do that now if underpinning has to be carried out. If the "related costs" are merely cosmetic, I don't mind paying for it insofar as they are not excessive just so things can move forward quickly. Different matter altogether if its more than filling a crack and replacing wallpaper! Thanks for your comments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top