Insurance, kitchen water damage

[fisherman]

On inspection, water was found under a kitchen sink. Water seems to have been spraying from a fitting or dishwasher hose (crack or fitting to tap failed?) and the under part of a section of the sink bench and the adjoining cupboards has swelled and is mouldy. A quote is being obtained to fix.

The cover mentions coverage accidents involving "fixed pipes and anything attached to a pipe" and also "a washing machine or dishwasher". The last mentioned could mean just the dishwasher and not the flexible pipe that came with it and is a part of same.

Just on the question of insurance, has anyone ever lodged a claim for similar, ie accident and what was the outcome? I am not going to waste my hours and blood pressure on an insurer if this is yet another area where claims are regularly refused through weasel 'outs'.

 

[SRB]

I have had some battles with insurance companies over the years, even had disputes resolved with the Financial Ombudsman in my favour that meant the insurance company not only had to pay, but had to pay interest which had accrued whilst they refused a claim. In that case the dispute was over pipes, the policy says they cover pipes, yet the exemptions basically rules out all possible ways a pipe could be broken. Its a disgrace. I even asked the claims officer to give me an example of how an underground pipe could be damaged that would be covered by the policy and she couldn't.

Ways they can get out of it -

Damage was pre-existing before the policy commenced.
Damage is normal wear and tear or caused by normal wear and tear.
Damage is the result of a lack of maintanence.

The trick is to research the policy, carefully read the section that states what you are covered for, then read the section about you are not covered for .... there is not much that they do once you drill down into it.

Generally I find they insure an "event" like flood, fire, tree through your roof, lightning, earthquake etc.

Put a claim in .... they can only say no.

 

[brettc]

On inspection, water was found under a kitchen sink. Water seems to have been spraying from a fitting or dishwasher hose (crack or fitting to tap failed?) and the under part of a section of the sink bench and the adjoining cupboards has swelled and is mouldy. A quote is being obtained to fix.

The cover mentions coverage accidents involving "fixed pipes and anything attached to a pipe" and also "a washing machine or dishwasher". The last mentioned could mean just the dishwasher and not the flexible pipe that came with it and is a part of same.

Just on the question of insurance, has anyone ever lodged a claim for similar, ie accident and what was the outcome? I am not going to waste my hours and blood pressure on an insurer if this is yet another area where claims are regularly refused through weasel 'outs'.

These are extremely difficult claims as there are a lot of factors that come into it, and knowing what actually occurred can be hard to ascertain. It really comes down to a case by case basis and depends upon the policy you have in place. On the surface it sounds as though it may be covered under “burst pipes” but it gets more complicated if it has been a gradual problem, water seeping out causing damage over time. In saying that if it is a tenanted property and the owner was not made aware of the problem occurring it would again increase the likelihood of a successful claim.

It would be nice to say that everything is black and white when it comes to insurance, but two problems come to mind:

• the reality is that for every honest policyholder with a legitimate claim there is a dishonest one trying to cheat the system
• insurance has to draw the line somewhere, insuring is about minimising risk, not negating it altogether. Sure you could negate it completely but no-one would be able to afford the premiums, so it defeats the purpose.

 

[fisherman]

Thank you SRB and brettc for your replies.

It seems that Plain English policies are rarely plain English.

From the repairer who visited, a fitting failure is the likely culprit. It was an original manufacturer's item, so it was just bad luck.

It is a reminder that many people don't look too carefully in the sink cupboard if it is only used occasionally, and corner cupboards with annoying bi-fold doors may rarely be used. Anyhow, a fine water spray has made two cupboards U/S. The water has managed to move under the lino floor covering as well.

It is the wording of policies that frustrates. I accept policy exclusions. But I sure would like to know exactly what I am paying for so I can make an informed choice. It is impossible to compare policies if you don't really know what is included.

 

[SRB]

It is the wording of policies that frustrates. I accept policy exclusions. But I sure would like to know exactly what I am paying for so I can make an informed choice. It is impossible to compare policies if you don't really know what is included.

This is where I took the insurance company to task and won.

In the "what is covered" on the PDS it lists all these things including pipes and services connect to or from your house, in my case, a sewer pipe got blocked and after $3000 excavations etc it was replaced.

But in the "exclusions" at the back of the PDS it talks about actions of tree roots and soil subsidence being excluded.

Given that the pipe was 1.5 metres under ground I asked the claims officer to give me one possible cause of breaking an underground pipe that actually would be covered. She couldn't, so I argued, successfully, that they should never have said they covered those pipes as there was no way they could be broken other than by an "exclusion".

They sent out an "assessor" who took one photo, concluded it was tree roots or soil subsidence, and left. I know a bit about evidence, so I did my own investigation. There were no tree roots, only grass and small shrubs. I inspected the broken pipe when removed, it was clogged with couch grass roots, not broken by a tree root. I researched soil subsidence and found the most common cause was a leaking pipe. The Ombudsman found in my favour because a) there was no tree roots, let alone anything capable of breaking a sewer pipe and b) the soil subsidence was caused by the leaking pipe, not vice versa. Therefore the "assessor" was wrong and the claim was paid. It was a very sweet victory for the little man.

I learnt from that to first read your policy and exclusions before making the claim so they cant write you off at the first attempt, and then not take the first no from them as the end of it. Complain, complain, complain. Often its better financially for them that they pay you rather than be put through the drawn out complaints process.

 

[fisherman]

I have decades of multiple house insurances. My wife has claimed once on one of her properties. She had decades of no claims.

Frankly this accidental damage coincides with some agonising I am going through concerning the coverage I have traditionally held for properties, and the large hikes in premiums over the past decade. Many more owners would be reviewing their insurance practices of a life time.

Maybe the cheapest plain vanilla available each year is the way to go: put all of my policies up for auction as they renew every year, going for the bargain basement premium.

 

[Anh]

I am with RACQ and my previous PPOR was flooded as the toilet pipe burst. RACQ replaced all the carpets and reimburse us for damages to the kitchen area.

Took a long time for the walls to dry up with 4 commercial fans running all days for so many days.

QUOTE=fisherman;1001037]On inspection, water was found under a kitchen sink. Water seems to have been spraying from a fitting or dishwasher hose (crack or fitting to tap failed?) and the under part of a section of the sink bench and the adjoining cupboards has swelled and is mouldy. A quote is being obtained to fix.

The cover mentions coverage accidents involving "fixed pipes and anything attached to a pipe" and also "a washing machine or dishwasher". The last mentioned could mean just the dishwasher and not the flexible pipe that came with it and is a part of same.

Just on the question of insurance, has anyone ever lodged a claim for similar, ie accident and what was the outcome? I am not going to waste my hours and blood pressure on an insurer if this is yet another area where claims are regularly refused through weasel 'outs'.[/QUOTE]

 

[brettc]

I have decades of multiple house insurances. My wife has claimed once on one of her properties. She had decades of no claims.

Frankly this accidental damage coincides with some agonising I am going through concerning the coverage I have traditionally held for properties, and the large hikes in premiums over the past decade. Many more owners would be reviewing their insurance practices of a life time.

Maybe the cheapest plain vanilla available each year is the way to go: put all of my policies up for auction as they renew every year, going for the bargain basement premium.

The number 1 tip I will always have for anyone in regard to insurance is that selecting purely on price is the worst thing you can ever do. It's like buying a Daewoo and expecting it to run like a BMW.

The key is "value", not "cheap". Like with pretty much everything, you get what you pay for and insurance is no exception, cheap policies generally result in less cover.

In saying that, it doesn't mean for a second that the most expensive policy is the best either, it's a case of ensuring that you will be covered for the risks that you wish to be covered for, and are willing to accept the risks in areas that you won't be covered. The number of times I've seen people who have scrimped on a few dollars on their insurance only to find the policy fall short, costing them thousands, when they had to make a claim.

The other thing to bear in mind is that it is not simply the policy conditions that need to be taken into account. The reputation of companies to work with you in the case of a claim, and provide service in relation to a claim, is just as important.