Tweet
Hallo
I posted last year about some of my problems with Zurich and my buildings insurance claim. I would appreciate advice or opinions about the following please. I will give brief details about the background, but what I am asking for advice about is recovery of expenses (see the last paragraph).
My subsidence insurance claim against Zurich will, in March 2016, have been on-going for 17 years and my house is unsellable. The claim was that suspected subsidence was causing a garage/utility room extension to separate from the main house. Initially Zurich insisted there was no subsidence and only took notice when the sale of the property fell through in 2001when it was confirmed by two structural engineers instructed by the prospective purchaser. The majority of the remedial work, including piling, took place in summer 2007. The above ground level part of the garage was rebuilt in early 2009. Zurich sent a firm to finish the repairs in late 2009/early 2010. I complained about various issues, including twice to the Financial Services Ombudsman, who refused to involve themselves and essentially said "leave it to Zurich" (or words to that effect). After my second complaint expressing my dissatisfaction, the Ombudsman essentially told me to "prove it". It has taken the best part of five years to obtain a report that names Zurich and its agents, along with the Ombudsman as being to blame and to rectify damage that Zurich and their agents missed when they all failed to test the drains and piled the garage/utility room extension and outside ground without establishing the cause of the subsidence. The structural engineer who wrote the report for me identified that the cause of the subsidence was a damaged water pipe that continued to leak long after the repairs in 2007. The garage is substantially structurally damaged and the report identifies other necessary work. I am also going to have to pay for a complete survey to establish the full extent of damage to my house. As it is, the house is unsellable, Zurich sent their expert to report in November but have not yet produced the report. Having told me to get the report to prove my allegations, now I have produced it, the Ombudsman has simply pushed the matter off to the side, saying there is no point in them getting involved at this stage, that if I'm not satisfied with Zurich's (eventual) proposals, I can complain to them at that stage.
The thing is, I am a disabled pensioner and my income is insufficient to pay the costs of living in this house so, since the 2001 sale, I have been topping up my pension income from savings - which are now close to being depleted. What would help is recovery of about £8,000 I spent on the report and various investigations. Zurich have refused my request. In complaining today about poor service from the Ombudsman, I came across a letter that the Ombudsman's Head of Casework wrote me in November 2010 saying " I agree with x that we have let you down". Plus, of course, I have the report attributing blame to the Ombudsman, Zurich, etc. So now I'm getting to the point - would I be premature in attempting recovery of these expenses, if necessary through the small claims court, and would the court be likely to say that Zurich and the Ombudsman do not have to pay these costs?
Thank you.
I posted last year about some of my problems with Zurich and my buildings insurance claim. I would appreciate advice or opinions about the following please. I will give brief details about the background, but what I am asking for advice about is recovery of expenses (see the last paragraph).
My subsidence insurance claim against Zurich will, in March 2016, have been on-going for 17 years and my house is unsellable. The claim was that suspected subsidence was causing a garage/utility room extension to separate from the main house. Initially Zurich insisted there was no subsidence and only took notice when the sale of the property fell through in 2001when it was confirmed by two structural engineers instructed by the prospective purchaser. The majority of the remedial work, including piling, took place in summer 2007. The above ground level part of the garage was rebuilt in early 2009. Zurich sent a firm to finish the repairs in late 2009/early 2010. I complained about various issues, including twice to the Financial Services Ombudsman, who refused to involve themselves and essentially said "leave it to Zurich" (or words to that effect). After my second complaint expressing my dissatisfaction, the Ombudsman essentially told me to "prove it". It has taken the best part of five years to obtain a report that names Zurich and its agents, along with the Ombudsman as being to blame and to rectify damage that Zurich and their agents missed when they all failed to test the drains and piled the garage/utility room extension and outside ground without establishing the cause of the subsidence. The structural engineer who wrote the report for me identified that the cause of the subsidence was a damaged water pipe that continued to leak long after the repairs in 2007. The garage is substantially structurally damaged and the report identifies other necessary work. I am also going to have to pay for a complete survey to establish the full extent of damage to my house. As it is, the house is unsellable, Zurich sent their expert to report in November but have not yet produced the report. Having told me to get the report to prove my allegations, now I have produced it, the Ombudsman has simply pushed the matter off to the side, saying there is no point in them getting involved at this stage, that if I'm not satisfied with Zurich's (eventual) proposals, I can complain to them at that stage.
The thing is, I am a disabled pensioner and my income is insufficient to pay the costs of living in this house so, since the 2001 sale, I have been topping up my pension income from savings - which are now close to being depleted. What would help is recovery of about £8,000 I spent on the report and various investigations. Zurich have refused my request. In complaining today about poor service from the Ombudsman, I came across a letter that the Ombudsman's Head of Casework wrote me in November 2010 saying " I agree with x that we have let you down". Plus, of course, I have the report attributing blame to the Ombudsman, Zurich, etc. So now I'm getting to the point - would I be premature in attempting recovery of these expenses, if necessary through the small claims court, and would the court be likely to say that Zurich and the Ombudsman do not have to pay these costs?
Thank you.
