Can insurance company sue me?

[des8]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

I assume the fire that was started by the person resident with you also damaged a neighbouring building.

In that case, if they are to successfully hold you liable for that damage they would have to demonstrate you were responsible for the fire.

The fact that the fire was in a property you rented is not proof you were responsible.
The fact that fire investigator's OPINION was that the fire was started by "smoking materials"is not proof you were responsible.
As you stated earlier you are a non smoker (and presumably that can be supported by statements from friends etc) that will make it difficult.

"They will claim reliability under the policy, it is unlikely they will want the money off me. HOWEVER, if they find I am liable THEN they will pursue me for the cost!!!"

I'm not sure who's who in that sentence!, but if "they find you are liable then they will pursue you" is utter tosh.
You have liability cover, so if A COURT finds you liable, then your liability insurers pick up the tab.

Time scale 6 years to start a claim I think (haven't checked) but a bit academic now. Now it has started it goes on for as long as it takes.
I don't see the T&Cs of rental contract being that important. Neighbours insurers are looking to recoup their losses for fire damage arising from a fire in your property. From their point of view it is simply a question of who caused the fire and who is responsible. As you are the tenant they might reasonably assume you have liability cover which insures you and your guests in this situation.
Your insurers are possibly seeking sight of your tenancy agreement to see if they have any wiggle room to pass liability on to the property owner and hence his insurers

Talk to CAB, they might have different viewpoint.

[Contessa]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

"They will claim reliability under the policy, it is unlikely they will want the money off me. HOWEVER, if they find I am liable THEN they will pursue me for the cost!!!"
(They = Ageas)

I will speak to CAB and maybe call the solicitors whilst I am there.

I spoke to my ex earlier to tell him the situation and I WANTED him to tell me the TRUTH of what happened.
He had his drink as normal and crawled into bed.
His bedroom was on the side of the house where the garage was, he heard the loud noise and went to check what it was.
Thats when I must have looked out the window and heard him shout "fire" from downstairs.
He had followed me out after he tried to put the fire out with a saucepan of water.
I obviously did not see him until the next morning - under his quilt because he was already told it was safe to go back in. He was trying to avoid the journalist who was asking questions (who I never saw or knew about until it was in our local newspaper the following week.)
I must have stayed too long accross the road at a neighbours.
I challenged him - that he had told me about leaving a candle on. He said that was his re-occuring nightmare after the incident and as my mental state was all over the place "I weren't LISTENING as USUAL" No wonder I left him!

I am confident to say that neither of us caused the fire and the fire report stated it was cigerettes BASED upon the FACT they found an ashtray FULL of buds in the garage. That is where he smoked as I would not allow him to smoke in the house and being winter it was warmer. I am astonished that the fire inspector NEVER found the REAL reason of what caused it. My ex used to keep all his working tools in there. Petrol cans, paint spray the usual stuff we all tend to keep outdoors. So in my head, it could have been anything.

Do you think they will pry into why i never had ex on tenancy agreement. I wasn't on his in the last place we stayed. I just don't like explaining my personal circumstanes unnecessarily to people.

I LIKE the way you stop me from worrying when you keep referring back to the "liability cover."

I will keep you informed with what the CAB tell me tomorrow.

Thanks so much for your help so far - its been GREAT"!

[des8]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

I don't understand that quote from Ageas, it just makes no sense.

Cigarette or candle, it makes no difference.
If he was responsible for either, then he caused the fire.
If he was your guest, your tenancy might make you liable, but in that case your policy covers you.
If he was a co-tenant (although without a written tenancy) he might be held liable.

[Contessa]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

I went to the CAB and he told me "This is way over our head". I knew they could not help.

I spoke to the solicitors. They asked about the night of the incident - so I told them.
Was I in the garage the night before the incident. "NO"
If I was a smoker - NO.
Was my ex in the garage the night before? "I do not know as we hardly spoke"
What were you told about the fire report? "It was accidental and they found an ashtray full of buds, but my strict rules were that NO-ONE was allowed to smoke in the house, you have to go outdoors. The same rules apply here where i rent."
Was your ex a smoker? "Yes"

Asked ALOT about my ex, apparently there is an allegation made against him by the landlord. The ex told the landlord that he was in the garage the night before the fire incident...........which means my ex keeps lying about his story that he is telling me! They believe that my ex discarded an inflammable item.
They asked for his contact details, I went to give her the number and the conversation proceeded, then she NEVER took it off me. Is that a BAD sign?

At this stage the solicitors will defend the claim they have received.
If I think of anything - to call them.
They will in the near future send me a statement to sign about what I had said over the phone.
IF I get any correspondence from the landlords insurers – do NOT reply back to them, forward ALL correspondence to the solicitors.
The Landlord’s insurers are disputing the payout.
They will keep me informed as there are developments in the case.
I gave them my contact number.

I did get upset though, I told them they were opening wounds that had closed FIVE years ago.

[des8]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

First things first: 1) write to Ageas confirming your telephone conversation of yesterday, with whom you spoke and what you understood was said.
Also ask for a copy of the relevant policy, including schedule and completed proposal form.
2) write to solicitor confirming your telephone conversation, with whom you spoke and what you understand was discussed.

Did the solicitor explain why the landlord's insurers were involved? you said post 105 that it was the neighbour's insurers who were seeking reimbursement.

Regarding your ex, anything you repeat that he told you is solely hearsay, and really of no import.
If asked about him you are correctly sticking solely to FACTS you know egWas my ex in the garage the night before? "I do not know as we hardly spoke"


They asked for his contact details, I went to give her the number and the conversation proceeded, then she NEVER took it off me. Is that a BAD sign?
NO.Only a sign she is not as efficient as she would pretend to be

At this stage they are just trying to ascertain what happened, and if possible who was responsible for the fire.
If it turns out it was your ex, your insurers will be examining his position in the household and the proposal form to see if he was covered by the policy either as a guest or a member.
If he wasn't covered by the policy they won't pay up.
As you weren't responsible you can't be held liable.

[Contessa]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

Will do......

Did the solicitor explain why the landlord's insurers were involved? you said post 105 that it was the neighbour's insurers who were seeking reimbursement. Ageas said "Neighbours insurance". Solicitor said "Landlords" insurance. Exactly my point - I find them contradiciting!

According to the solicitors my EX went and told the landlord after the incident that he was sorting ebay stuff before the fire! Based on this conversation, the dispute was started.

Since I told the solicitor we broke up during the time we lived their does it make a difference?
This policy under RSA states "All members of the household are relatives of you or the second policyholder" Reality is he was related to my child.
I stated I was "Single". Which I WAS.
Premises are NOT used for BUSINESS - I am sure EBAY is not classed as a business.
It was occupied during the day 9am - 5pm - as he was unemployed. (Although I worked part time).
Do you think they may try and VOID the policy?

What I said:
It was approx 4 or 5am, I was in bed with my toddler.
I heard fireworks outside, thinking “What inconsiderate so and so’s.”
When I looked out the back bedroom window, I could see orange light at the side of the property.
I ran downstairs to look and there was fire outside the kitchen door coming from the garage. The flames were high and you could see it was going to hit the back of the house.
I ran back upstairs, grabbed my toddler and ran out of the house.
I cannot remember if I called the fire brigade or someone else did.
3 fire engines turned up.
A neighbour looked after us until the fire was put out.
There was a reporter lurking around.
I called my place of work to tell them I would not be in.
I called the landlord straight away to inform him of what had happened.
Solicitor NEVER ONCE asked me where the EX was during any of the above.......

ME - “I had not been asked any questions at the time by the insurance company.”
Solicitor - "You would not have been, but now the Landlord’s insurers are disputing the payout."

Solicitor- "Is there anything that you think may have caused the fire?"
ME - “We kept tools, petrol strimmers, paints etc there. I used to store the baby things in there as baby was developing into a toddler."

Solicitor - "Did you do anything in the garage the night before?"
ME- “No, I hardly went into the garage.”

Solicitor - "We believe EX discarded an inflammable item and we need to speak with him. Did you discuss the fire afterwards?
ME - “I started packing and finding another place to live as there was asbestos and the tiniest molecule can kill you. I was all over the place and my child had asthma. I really did not speak much to people after the incident, I was crying all the time and it was quite traumatising. I do not remember a lot of what was happening at the time."

Solicitor - "Do you know the whereabouts of your ex?"
ME - “No, The landlord agreed to keep him on as a tenant when I handed my notice in (because he knew I was a good tenant). The landlord kept calling me to say my ex had not paid the rent. Then again to say he was being evicted. My ex was evicted and moved into several hostels after that. He would give us a new number every so often, but majority of the time when we tried to call him the line was dead.” IT was at this point I offered his number - SOLICITOR forgot to take it.
Solicitor - "Well in that case the landlord will have a contract between them and would have had a forwarding address."

Solicitors - "Do you smoke?"
ME - “No. My rules apply here as they did there. No- one is allowed to smoke in the house, you go outside and smoke. I am a good and reliable tenant, I have been at my current address for 5 years and my landlord is prepared to renew my contract for a further 2 years”.

The above fills in the gaps of what I sent you earlier.

[des8]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

That's ok.
Even if your insurers void the policy I don't see you having any problems regarding liability.
It is fairy obvious from what you say that you were not responsible for the fire. If they cannot prove you were responsible they cannot prove your liability, so the fact your policy is voided doesn't matter.
Mind you if they can show your ex was responsible and therefore liable, he could have a problem!

eBay could be a business. Who was the eBayer? what sort of volumes and turn over? registered power seller or shop?
RSA policy wording now of no importance, it is the Ageas wording we need.

[Contessa]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

I never used ebay - he did, but I am not sure at what volume he sold things, because I really did not care.
I will pester them to give me that policy and schedule.
How can I word it now, they have all confirmed who they are, that was my way of trying to get my hands on it.
I have wrote to you on several occassions requesting for my policy and schedule at the time of the incident, I have yet not received a copy. Do you think they might say, "Well you already have one, why do you need another?"
Someone pointed out to me - they must have sent it via email.........................I can't retrieve it, that account was closed years ago.

[des8]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

Well even if you had it, it could easily have been lost in the house move.

[Contessa]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

Ok. I will keep you posted next week.

[Contessa]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

I wrote to Ageas and requested copy of policy.
Solicitors have wrote back to me:
"You will note that you are named as the Defendant and that it is alleged that you have breached your tenancy agreement with the Landlord, and were negligent, in failing to use the property in a tenant like manner. It is currently our intention to defend the claim presented on the basis that the Claimants have not provided any evidence that you, or you partner, caused the fire.
We have agreed with Landlords insurers that a full response will be provided by 1.6.15. We will be preparing the response to the letter of claim shortly, and would therefore ask that you contact us before 20.5.15, should you disagree with our proposals or should you have any further information of which we should be aware following the telephone conversation.
We ask you refrain from communicating with Landlords insurers and send all correspondence directly to us. "

[Contessa]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

I was given a copy of the letter the landlords insurers sent Ageas:
We are instructed by the Claimants and their insurers, to pursue recovery of losses following the fire incident.
1.PARTIES – Claimant/Defendants.
2. ENCLOSURES
3. SUMMARY of FACTS:
3.1 The claimant is the owner of the property, the Defendant entered into a tenancy agreement with the Claimant for the grant of the lease of the property.
3.2 On the morning of …… at 6am the Defendant awoke to a loud noise. The Defendant went downstairs and discovered the garage, which is located in the rear garden, was on fire. The tenant notified her partner who immediately went outside and used a garden hose in an attempt to contain and extinguish the fire. As this proved to be unsuccessful, the Defendant rang the emergency services.
3.3 The Fire Service arrived shortly thereafter and with the use of high pressure water hoses, contained the fire. The fire commander found the source of ignition was the careless disposal of smoking materials.
3.4 The fire itself was limited to the detached garage at the property, together with the adjoining shed. However, the decking and extension at the rear of the property was also damaged, as evidenced by the repair quotation enclosed.
The Claimants insurers appointed a loss adjuster who made further enquiries with the Defendant, who confirmed that her partner used to smoke in the garden.
4. NATURE OF RELIEF CLAIMED:
The Claimant claims damages arising from the remedial works required to the property.
We refer you to the enclosed quotation, but the quantum maybe summarised as follows………..
5. BASIS OF CLAIM:
The Claimant has undertaken investigations into the matter and established that you are liable for the damage and resulting loss. The particulars of this claim are set below:
5.1 CONTRACT
5.1.1 It is common ground that between the parties that all materials times, the Defendant occupied the property under a tenancy agreement entered into with the Claimant. It is also common ground that to date, the parties representatives have been unable to obtain a copy of the tenancy agreement, which, in view of the lapse of time, is understandable.
5.1.2 Notwithstanding the absence of the tenancy agreement, the Claimant wishes to rely on the Defendants duty, as tenant of the Property, to use the demised premises in a tenant like manner, which is implied into all tenancies.
5.1.2 The losses and damage arising from the careless disposal of smoking materials arose naturally from the breach of duty and/or was within the reasonable contemplation of the parties at the time they entered into the tenancy agreement.
5.2.1 In the alternative, the Defendant is in breach of its common law of duty of care to the Claimant to use the Property in a tenant like manner. We rely on the following well known passages from LJ Denning in Warren v Keen (1954) 1 Q.B. 15 page 20:
5.2.1 “Apart from express contract a tenant owes no duty to the landlord to keep the premises in repair. The only duty of the tenant is to use the premises in a husbandlike, or what is the same thing, a tenantlike manner.”
5.2.2 “In addition, he must, of course, not damage the house willfully or negligently, and he must see that his family and guests do not damage it, and if they do, he must repair it.”
5.2.3 Causation is satisfied because damage at the property was a direct result of the breach of duty, and damage loss caused was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the breach.
5.2.4 For the avoidance of doubt, the Claimant does not need a copy of the tenancy agreement to establish its causes of action against the Defendant as set out above.
6. PRE ACTION DISCLOSURE:
We refer you to the paragraph 6.1 (1)of the practice direction. We would ask you to forward to us all documentation in support of your position, in order that we can avoid an expensive escalation of costs. In the event that you fail to provide your documents, which is contrary to the Practice Direction, we will apply to the Court for these documents and we will seek costs in respect of the claim from yourselves.
6.1 We understand that a copy of the tenancy agreement is not in the possession of the Defendant or their representatives, however, should they come into possession, we agree to disclose the same.
6.2 Any other documentation in your control or possession upon which you intended to rely.
7. ADR:
We refer you to the paragraph 6.1 (2) of the Practice Direction and with the objective of avoiding costs of litigation, our client is prepared to enter into alternative forms of dispute resolution. In our assessment the option available for resolving this matter without starting proceedings are discussions and negotiations or mediation. We would appreciate confirmation which option the Defendant is agreeable to.
8. FUNDING:
We have entered into a collective conditional fee agreement with the Claimant.
9. COSTS:
It is a condition precedant to our client accepting any final figure for damages/in respect of the substantive claim that costs will be paid in addition. Those costs will be subject to Part 8 proceedings and/or detailed assessment proceedings unless agreed either at the time of, or subsequent to, agreement of damages in respect of the substantive claim.
Pursuant to paragraph 7.2 of the Practice Direction, we would ask you for your acknowledgement of this letter, following which we would appreciate a full response in respect of your position on liability within further 30 days from the date of your acknowledgement.
We refer to pargagraph 4 of the Practice Direction concerning the Courts power to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction.
In the absence of your ackowlegdement and/or full written response, we will consider that you deny liability and the Claimant will be entitled to commence Court proceedings without further compliance with this protocol, which may increase your liability for costs. Alternatively, the Claimant may choose to make a pre-action disclosure application to the Court in accordance with CPR 31.16 for documentation that you are seeking to rely upon in support of your position and seek recovery of the costs doing so.

[Contessa]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

The solicitors letters are in a foreign language, can you kindly explain in plain english what they are going on about?

This is from the landlords solicitors "The tenant notified her partner who immediately went outside and used a garden hose in an attempt to contain and extinguish the fire. As this proved to be unsuccessful, the Defendant rang the emergency services." Unfortunately, I forgot to mention this bit to Weightmans solicitor as I could not remeber EVERYTHING from 5 years ago, I did say "I honestly cannot remember if I called the fire service". But it looks they have it noted down from the Landlords insurance company, so I do not need to call Weightmans and clarify it?

It is also common ground that to date, the parties representatives have been unable to obtain a copy of the tenancy agreement, which, in view of the lapse of time, is understandable. WHY is this so important to them - it looks like NO ONE has got hold of this.

However, the decking and extension at the rear of the property was also damaged, as evidenced by the repair quotation enclosed. This decking was paid for and put up by me and my partner. I did not realise they had paid the landlord our money.

I spoke to Garry again and he had told the landlord, he believed it was electrics and NEVER mentioned ebay. When Garry was not paying the rent (after I had left that property) the landlord used to call me and say, "He is earning money by selling on ebay, but he is NOT paying my rent". He was then evicted in July 2010, the same month the landlord informed the insurance company that Garry had started the fire and the dispute commenced. I am unsure who to believe out of them 2, as I am now under the impression the landlord was angry at the time and felt the need for revenge (I know a bit dramatic - but we all know what people are capable of).

Do you think I should get a solicitor involved now?

[des8]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

OK so you have no real concerns.
Your insurers are defending the claim. If they lose they should pay it.
They must have had knowledge of the claim sometime ago (the preaction protocols they mention are now outdated!) and really should have informed you as soon as they received it, and advised you not to respond to the claimants. It's just good practice.

[des8]

Re: Can insurance company sue me?

The solicitors letters are in a foreign language, can you kindly explain in plain english what they are going on about?

This is from the landlords solicitors "The tenant notified her partner who immediately went outside and used a garden hose in an attempt to contain and extinguish the fire. As this proved to be unsuccessful, the Defendant rang the emergency services." Unfortunately, I forgot to mention this bit to Weightmans solicitor as I could not remeber EVERYTHING from 5 years ago, I did say "I honestly cannot remember if I called the fire service". But it looks they have it noted down from the Landlords insurance company, so I do not need to call Weightmans and clarify it?

It is also common ground that to date, the parties representatives have been unable to obtain a copy of the tenancy agreement, which, in view of the lapse of time, is understandable. WHY is this so important to them - it looks like NO ONE has got hold of this.

However, the decking and extension at the rear of the property was also damaged, as evidenced by the repair quotation enclosed. This decking was paid for and put up by me and my partner. I did not realise they had paid the landlord our money.

I spoke to Garry again and he had told the landlord, he believed it was electrics and NEVER mentioned ebay. When Garry was not paying the rent (after I had left that property) the landlord used to call me and say, "He is earning money by selling on ebay, but he is NOT paying my rent". He was then evicted in July 2010, the same month the landlord informed the insurance company that Garry had started the fire and the dispute commenced. I am unsure who to believe out of them 2, as I am now under the impression the landlord was angry at the time and felt the need for revenge (I know a bit dramatic - but we all know what people are capable of).

Do you think I should get a solicitor involved now?

If you are concerned about any aspect, do advise the solicitors (Weightmans), as by acting for your insurers they are also acting for you. There should not be any need to employ your own solicitor.
Do tell them the decking was your improvement to the property. Although improvements to the fabric of a rented property become part of the landlords ownership (I think), I don't believe he is entitled to claim for temporary add ons (like decking) which you could have removed before vacating the premises. All he could have claimed for would be demolition and removal of damaged decking, not replacement. (at least that's my opinion!)