Tweet
Hi Beagles! You were all so helpful last time, I thought I would pray for some help from you all again!
I have a very long-running dispute with my insurers over a claim from Nov 2014 for a boiler which got damaged. I'll try and be as concise as possible.
After much too'ing and fro'ing the financial ombudsman decided I was covered under the "tenants improvements" section of my policy due to a clause in my lease which made me responsible for insuring, and not my landlord. My insurance company then claimed that as that clause also included many other items, I had a large value of under-insurance and therefore only offered me 25% of my claim.
This is the clause in the lease:
"Where the use of any pipes, sewers, drains, mains, ducts, conduits, gutters, watercourses, wires, cables, channels, flues, conducting media, boundary structures or other things is common to the Premises and any adjoining or neighbouring premises, other than any adjoining property of the Landlord, the Tenant must be responsible for, and indemnify the Landlord against, all sums due from the owner, tenant or occupier of the Premises in relation to those pipes, sewers, drains, mains, ducts, conduits, gutters, watercourses, wires, cables, channels, flues, conducting media, boundary structures and other things, and must undertake all work in relation to them that is his responsibility.”
I accept that whilst this clause does make me responsible to insure these items, however surely not all of them can be classified as "tenants improvements" (surely things like sewers, boundary structures etc are insured under my buildings insurance?)
My insurance company do not adequately define what Tenant's Improvements actually are under their policy, and the insurance industry definition I found says:
“Changes made to the interior of a commercial or industrial property by its owner to accommodate the needs of a tenant such as floor and wall coverings, ceilings, partitions, air conditioning, fire protection, and security. Who bears what portion of TI costs is negotiated between the lessor and the lessee, and is usually documented in the lease agreement.”
I am covered for £10,000 of Tenants improvements which easily covers everything under this definition, however my insurance company are claiming that the value of everything in the clause is £150,000 as they have valued a complete re-build including sewers etc!
I have asked various surveyors etc if they can give me an independent valuation of tenants improvements, however it's very difficult for them to value it without having a definition to value.
Should I take my insurance company to the small claims court or will I just get brushed aside. The full claim is for £3,500 so it obviously is silly for me to spend a lot of money on a solicitor.
Would love to hear your thoughts on it!
Thank you in advance!
I have a very long-running dispute with my insurers over a claim from Nov 2014 for a boiler which got damaged. I'll try and be as concise as possible.
After much too'ing and fro'ing the financial ombudsman decided I was covered under the "tenants improvements" section of my policy due to a clause in my lease which made me responsible for insuring, and not my landlord. My insurance company then claimed that as that clause also included many other items, I had a large value of under-insurance and therefore only offered me 25% of my claim.
This is the clause in the lease:
"Where the use of any pipes, sewers, drains, mains, ducts, conduits, gutters, watercourses, wires, cables, channels, flues, conducting media, boundary structures or other things is common to the Premises and any adjoining or neighbouring premises, other than any adjoining property of the Landlord, the Tenant must be responsible for, and indemnify the Landlord against, all sums due from the owner, tenant or occupier of the Premises in relation to those pipes, sewers, drains, mains, ducts, conduits, gutters, watercourses, wires, cables, channels, flues, conducting media, boundary structures and other things, and must undertake all work in relation to them that is his responsibility.”
I accept that whilst this clause does make me responsible to insure these items, however surely not all of them can be classified as "tenants improvements" (surely things like sewers, boundary structures etc are insured under my buildings insurance?)
My insurance company do not adequately define what Tenant's Improvements actually are under their policy, and the insurance industry definition I found says:
“Changes made to the interior of a commercial or industrial property by its owner to accommodate the needs of a tenant such as floor and wall coverings, ceilings, partitions, air conditioning, fire protection, and security. Who bears what portion of TI costs is negotiated between the lessor and the lessee, and is usually documented in the lease agreement.”
I am covered for £10,000 of Tenants improvements which easily covers everything under this definition, however my insurance company are claiming that the value of everything in the clause is £150,000 as they have valued a complete re-build including sewers etc!
I have asked various surveyors etc if they can give me an independent valuation of tenants improvements, however it's very difficult for them to value it without having a definition to value.
Should I take my insurance company to the small claims court or will I just get brushed aside. The full claim is for £3,500 so it obviously is silly for me to spend a lot of money on a solicitor.
Would love to hear your thoughts on it!
Thank you in advance!
Comment