home insurance not going to pay out :/

[NameChangeCentral]

Hello!

Could anyone give me any advice, please?

The other night, rainwater leaked in our Velux window, causing damage to the plasterboard on the sloped ceiling and wall.
I submitted a claim to the home/contents insurance for the repairs to the window/flashing (we're not sure what the issue actually is yet) and the plasterboard.

I received a phonecall to say that we will not get a penny for this because it isn't classed as storm damage (ie wind speed that night was not over X mph, and rainfall was less than X amount).
Accidental damage will also not pay out, for the same reasons.

I am gobsmacked that we are paying for insurance for (we assumed) covering such incidents and issues, yet when we need them to help they aren't paying out.
We're not sure whether the water is coming in the join in the frame, or whether it's the flashing, but if the full window needs replaced and the blown plasterboard needs replaced and painted, it'll be a sizeable sum of money (which we don't have!)
We have temporarily patched it up to make it watertight, but this obs won't last long.

So, I wonder if anyone could give me some advice on how a claim could potentially be made, or if it is pretty standard etc for rain damage to be rejected?

Thanks in advance :)

Sorry no advice but I'll bump, this is why I don't even bother with insurance i just save the amount it costs every month because they hardly ever actually payout there terms are so long and often free them of most stuff

I would never expect leaks like that to be covered. Most of the time it's down to usual wear over the years. I've never lived anywhere the roof hasn't leaked at some point yet, maybe I'm just unlucky though.

I suppose they are saying its not an insurance issue as much as a maintenance issue and they don't pay out for the sort of thing

It's because insurance covers unpredictable events (eg storms), not things that will eventually always happen (windows leaking because they just need maintenance, which is presumable the case here).

When you buy insurance you are pooling the risk of things that may or may not happen, not saving up to pay out on routine stuff.

If it's not an insured event it's not covered. Sounds like it's damage due to wear and tear on your windows.

Insurance covers unexpected events, so things that would come under normal house maintenance (or failure to keep up house maintenance i.e. things have got into a state of disrepair but you haven't noticed ) would be on you.
So from that point of view I'm not surprised they've declined the claim. However, you could appeal, if you read your policy and think there is an adjective of it that this would fall under, try an appeal as they are often successful where the original claim isn't.

usually home insurance have a clause about keeping the property in a good state.

I know it seems unfair, especially as there is no house mot where you would look at everything and get small issues fixed at regular intervals.

Adjective = aspect. 😆

The window/flashing may not be covered but the consequential damage to ceiling might still be.

Accidental insurance is cover things that are caused by accident, e.g. dropping a hammer in a sink and cracking it. A leaking window isn't an accident.
The insurance company will say it's normal wear and tear and not covered so won't pay for repairs to the window or flashing, or for it to be replaced. But they should pay for the damage caused by the water from the leaking window, i.e. the damage to the plasterboard. Whether it's worth claiming just for the plasterboard is another matter depending on the excess on the policy and the fact your premiums will probably increase once you have made a claim.

How old is your property? If it is less than 10 years, then if the flashing wasn't fitted properly you might be able to claim against the building defect guarantee.

Insurance companies are famously good at getting out of paying.

Vote with your feet, find another company but in all honesty a leaky window is not an accident, it’s wear n tear.

I used to work in household insurance claims many years ago.
A storm event is something an insurer will pay out for but the weather conditions need to meet a certain threshold. Of these conditions are not met then an insurer will class the leaking from the window as wear and tear/main tree maintenance which is not something they will pay out on as it is not an uncertain event.
Sometimes the damage that is caused by the leaking window so the redecoration and replastering is covered if you have taken out accidental damage cover.

Thanks everyone. Yep, I personally didn't suggest it was an accidental incident, it was the rep who phoned who said that it previously would have paid out for the decor/plasterboard under accidental cover, but not any more.
I've asked for the dates where that stopped and just received a reply to state that it was in March. I didnt receive any email notifying me of changes, so I might be able to argue this with them. Altho my insurance renewed in June, so I think they'll manage to argue out of it that I should have read the updated policy wording at that point

The repairs to the window will be classed as general wear and tear so not covered under the insurance policy.

However -
You were not aware of the leak - so any resultant damage will be classed as accidental damage under the terms of your policy. The advisor may not know this or they may have an automatic- computer says no policy - this is literally the definition of accidental damage.

Keep pushing for this - obviously this only applies if this was the first instance- if it's happened over a period of time they will decline.

@RaelImperialAerosolKid

The repairs to the window will be classed as general wear and tear so not covered under the insurance policy.

However -
You were not aware of the leak - so any resultant damage will be classed as accidental damage under the terms of your policy. The advisor may not know this or they may have an automatic- computer says no policy - this is literally the definition of accidental damage.

Keep pushing for this - obviously this only applies if this was the first instance- if it's happened over a period of time they will decline.

Nope, you're wrong I'm afraid. It's consequential loss as a result of wear and tear.

That's standard - you just go to the ombusmen, and they sort it out.

It would be consequential if this had been an ongoing problem - ie leaked over a period of time and got worse - if this damage had been caused by a one off leak then it would be classed as AD !

I would've paid out - but most claims of this type are repudiated as standard - unless pushed

Agree with pps.

When our velux leaked ultimately it was because they were 30 years old and installed at an incorrect pitch so the water had eventually got in along the seam between the glass and the frame at the bottom edge. I wouldn't have considered an insurance claim for this.