to not pay my neighbour's £1,000 insurance excess?

[washerwoman2]

Apologies for being so long! I live in a flat and the block has a caretaker. In March he left me a note saying the flat downstairs had reported a water leak and could I check it was my washing machine. I immediately went to their flat to ask about it. They were away for the weekend but I left a note with my mobile number on it. Over the course of a few tests - we never met - the tenant (the owner's son in law) told me it had been leaking for a few weeks but 'they had been away a lot'. Once the slow drip leak was established as coming from my washing machine it was fixed within 24 hours. I had not had a new machine installed so don't know why it started leaking.

2 months later the management co send me an email telling me the owner of the flat is making an insurance claim and I will be liable for the excess. Size of claim not mentioned. The owner of the flat was cc'd but did not respond when I said the tenant was at fault for not reporting it to me promptly and I would not pay it.

4 months later the owner sends an email including his bank details and asking for £1k. His insurance claim was for a whole new kitchen so approx 9k. I respond by saying I though the matter was closed as he had not contacted me for 4 months, am surprised at size of claim, can I see the damage and copies of docs including proof the excess is 1k. 4 weeks go by and I hear nothing. Then we meet at a residents meeting - even though he doesn't live here he owns 3 flats. His 2 children live in one each and he rents the third out.

He very nicely asks for £1k. I mention my email and he claims he never received it. I give him a hard copy and 4 days later he sends me the docs. As it's now 7 months since the leak, the damage has been repaired and I can't see it. My (suspicious) opinion is that some of the docs look like they have been edited and may not be the official docs. The amount paid out by the insurance co has been blacked out but is slightly legible and is more than he told me they had paid. The letter does say the excess is £1k. The emails he has sent are now full of comments about the flat being uninhabitable, the tenants had to live with mould, he has had considerable expense (which is a lie - he has paid £1k but is telling me it is more and the damaged kitchen was 18 years old so nearing end of useful life) and setting a seven day deadline to pay and if I don't pay we will enter a legal phase and it will end up costing me more.

AIBU to not pay on the grounds that I was not negligent (if anyone was negligent it's his son in law who knew there was a leak and did nothing), and he has not been open, timely and honest re communication etc. As I understand it, the law says he would have to prove I was negligent to take me to court and I don't think he could prove that.

When this happened in my flat (leak from bathroom above through our bathroom ceiling), the buildings insurance paid out. Check your details.

He has no business trying to claim anything from you personally. I'd get a solicitor's letter pronto, stating your position, and telling him that you will pursue him for harassment if he continues to contact you. Play hardball. He's a chancer.

Just checked my lease - there is a clause about making good damage to adjoining property:
To make good at the Lessee's expense to the satisfaction of the Lessors or their surveyor any damaged occasioned by the exercise of the rights demised to the Lessee.

So presumably if he wanted to pursue this he would tell the freeholder that I have breeched the lease and they would contact me?

To be clear he is asking me for his 1k excess, the block insurance paid out for a new kitchen less the excess.

Am sending him a letter saying I was not negligent, if the buildings insurer thought I was they would have tried to make a case against me. I sympathise that he had to shell out 1k at a time not of his own choosing but he has increased the value of his investment property by much more than 1k as he had an 18 yr old kitchen before and now has a brand new one.

My insurance legal helpline took some details but never called back - hopefully as they think this is going nowhere. I will need to call them again. I have written in the letter that I have passed the matter to my insurance co and also pointed out that his son in law told me he hadn't done anything about it for a few weeks.

This is really adding to my stress in life but I know that is what he wants - he is hoping I will decide to pay and make it go away.

You need to check the covenants in your Lease. It is not unusual for a Lease to contain a covenant obligating you to settle the excess on an insurance policy of neighbouring flats for any damage to them caused by you. Please take proper legal advice. I am a property lawyer.

Right.
A) If you live in a block of flats, the whole building is insured by the landlord or management company and the premium is covered by the service charge each flat owner pays. All of you therefore have the same insurer. If you needed to make a claim, you would also have a £1000 excess.
B) You need to check the terms of your Lease. It is not unusual for their to be an obligation that you are responsible for the excess on an insurance claim made by a neighbouring property when you have been the cause of the damage. That the management company have stepped in indicates you were the cause.

You live in a leasehold property and the terms of the Lease will determine the outcome. Please take proper legal advice. A lot of the responses you have had assume you are in a freehold property and that you have your own, separate buildings insurance policy.

Sorry, didn't mean to post twice.

The extract you have just posted from your Lease only relates to damage caused in the exercise of your rights . That means your rights of access to the flat, going in to other flats to maintain your flat etc. It doesn't relate to this scenario. There should be other provisions in the Lease relating to insurance.
Please repost this in Legal. I am concerned you get sound legal advice and not just opinion.

I don't know if this will help, but, in Oct. 2014 we discovered (when the ceiling underneath opened in 3 places and water came through)a hidden leak from our dishwasher. It was caused by a small part from the dishwasher, the insurance guys came and got the piece and hit up the dishwasher company for the money. Do you know exactly what caused the leak in your washing machine?
Good luck.

*2013 I mean.

As a managing agent for blocks of flats, who has seen this exact situation several times (even including the overpriced replacement kitchen!) sadly he is not trying it on.

Google Rylands v Fletcher for the case law. Damage caused by escape of water from your property to another property is your problem, ad you are responsible for his uninsured losses, which includes his insurance premium. If it went to court, you would lose (but court costs would be minimal since it would be small-claims-court).

The 'new for old' on the kitchen etc are all irrelevant, as are your views on the size of the excess which the freeholder agreed to when negotiating the buildings insurance renewal.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings

namelessposter that's interesting and useful but would the court not take into account the fact that the majority of the damage was caused because the downstairs flat owner was uncontactable and the premises inaccessible for a long time. If this hadn't been the case, the damage would have been much less severe. Once there was proper communication and access the problem was fixed within 24 hours, and it's not the OP's fault that that didn't happen months earlier. Surely the absentee owner should bear some responsibly for the magnitude of the damage?

Fish. If there is an insurance claim, the excess of £1k falls due. This is irrespective of the cost or extent of the repairs.

namelessposter is it usual for the tenant of the damaged flat to communicate directly with the tenant of the flat that caused the damage about repaying the excess? Would the managing agent not be involved in this?

Actually biggins, if the cost of the repair was under £1k, then that is what would be paid, and it wouldn't be done through insurance.

So this could have been the case had the leak been reported promptly.

Yes, that's usual. The managing agent is contracted to deliver the legal obligations of the freeholder as specified in the lease. Arbitrating or administrating what is effectively a private claim between two leaseholders wouldn't be covered by their remit.

Unfortunately the size of the claim is also not relevant. Any claim above £1k would give rise to a fixed excess, so even if they had reported it very quickly and here was much less damage, it is likely a claim would still have happened.

If the leaseholder feels the claim was excessive, they could make a complaint to the freeholder that his/her managing agent is permitting excessive claims (with supporting evidence - not easily procured!) and thus not adequately representing the rights of the leaseholders in managing insurance renewal premiums, or you could even report suspected insurance fraud to the insurer (again with evidence to back up the allegation) - but unless you could prove that the entire claim was fictitious, success in this would not make the matter of the excess go away.

Slithy, obviously if under £1k this wouldn't even be an issue as there wouldn't be an insurance claim

I think the poster was saying caught earlier the leak damage would've been less serious and potentially cost less than £1k to fix
However-

1. You are not obliged to be in your house regularly to make sure neighbours are not causing leaks
2. Even if the claim was less than £1k damage some people prefer to go through the insurance company to get independence and so on. I'm not sure whether you can stop the claimant doing this, although the managing agent may intervene.

Thanks nameless. Mrs Biggins not sure why you say would not be an issue if was under a grand and therefore no insurance claim? If neighbour had paid out, say, 800 quid he'd be trying to recover that from the OP.

In a nutshell, the fact that this is an insurance excess is a red herrring. The OP's leak damaged the neighbour's flat so he is claiming from her the amount that he had to spend to get it sorted. The fact that he's recovered all but 1k from the insurer means that his loss is only 1k. He is entitled to recover that from the person who caused the damage. Where this falls down however is that the OP does not have separate insurance to cover her liability to her neighbour (which she would do if it wasn't a block policy).

Don't you have to pay the excess before the cliam can go ahead.

And the delay in dealing with the leak is not so long as to be of any account. Many people work away from home, take long holidays, so the time period can be quite long before being considered contributory factor.

I was also once manager of a block of flats and had to deal with similar claims, nameless is right on this one.

nomama fair enough if the leak had not been noticed at all for a while because the tenant was away. However it must be arguable that it should have been reported as soon as it was noticed, rather than the tenant putting off dealing with it because he was busy travelling etc.

Not necessarily, Jessie. That's the problem. OP should not rely upon the time factor. It may be of help to her, but it may not.

That and I do think she is liable for the excess anyway. All her mitigating factors are down to inconvenience and annoyance. The root cause of the damage was her appliance. The block insurance has paid out according to its rules and he is out the excess, which he is entitled to reclaim from her.

That he has a new kitchen is his good luck - had OP made the claim I am sure she would have been just as quick to claim the full benefit of the policy she pays her share of. Basically, he has done nothing wrong, bar annoy OP.

Sorry, wasn't very clear. I meant in this situation, claim was clearly in excess of £1k

Argh. Crap phone.
... so there was an insurance claim, which was in issue. Not that there would be no right of claim if under £1k

We had almost the exact same thing... Leak from our flat caused damage to the one downstairs.

We claimed on our insurance and all work that needed doing downstairs was approved through our insurance company prior to it being done. I can't remember how much the excess was but it was a lot less than £1k. We paid the excess as we felt it was the right thing to do - our leak in our property caused them damage so it didn't seem fair for them to be out of pocket.

What Atticuslaw said - you need proper legal advice - the t'interweb is full of anecdotes but the contents of your lease will be the deciding terms.

It does look like, from what you have quoted from your lease that you will be liable for the excess. The fact that you haven't been pursued for your own negligence is certainly not evidence that you were not negligent, you were quite clearly negligent by not adequately maintaining your appliance.

As for your argument that it was the neighbours' fault for not being aware of it sooner, what nonsense! Are you suggesting they have to be at home all day long checking that you have not been negligent?

I am genuinely surprised that anybody could have this attitude, your machine leaked, causing damage, therefore it is perfectly reasonable that you are responsible for any out of pocket expenses incurred as a result.

batterypoweredhen surely no need to be so rude? The OP's point is not that the neighbour should have been at home to notice the leak, it is that the neighbour noticed the leak but did nothing to bring it to her attention, allegedly because he'd been away a lot.

That said, it only helps her if she can show that the damage would have cost less than 1k to fix if the leak had been notified to her as soon as it was discovered by the neighbour.