Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

121 replies

washerwoman2 · 25/11/2014 23:39

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.

OP posts:
ErNope · 13/06/2016 23:37

Joanne, did you purposely search for this thread? O.o

TooMuchMNTime · 14/06/2016 00:02

Hi came to this not realising it was a zombie one
First things that struck me, entire kitchen replaced?! Did op ever see the damage? I bet he was just trying it on
Also many block policies will have a clause about property being left empty. So I too wonder how this ended.

SundialShadow · 14/06/2016 00:56

Tell him that you will contact your insurance company to talk to his insurance company. You may never hear from him again.

LazyJournalistsQuoteMN · 14/06/2016 01:13

ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIEZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE

Bogeyface · 14/06/2016 01:36

Joanne is clearly touting for business....

Tezza1 · 14/06/2016 02:31

Blimey! Who on earth has a £1k excess? I just renewed our insurance and our excess is £50.

Last year, I increased my excess from (local equivalent) of 25 pounds to approx 500 pounds, and it actually reduced my insurance payments by 50%. In one year, I have more than saved one year's excess.

Tattieboggle · 14/06/2016 03:56

OP, how long did it take you to fix the leak from the time you were told abou it.

LellyMcKelly · 14/06/2016 04:23

£1000 for a washing machine leak? If they didn't report it promptly then surely the fault lies with them?

namechangeparents · 14/06/2016 07:10

I know this is a zombie thread but I don't think the OP would be liable just like that as Joanna claims. You would have to have proof of damage, that the OP's washing machine caused it, and that the OP could not have reasonably done anything to prevent it. Also that the victim has mitigated their loss (so eg it would be relevant if they did not tell the OP for ages, and then the damage is worse because of it).

As for the likelihood of a washing machine having a leak - well I've had several washing machines and none of them have ever leaked - in two decades or so.

You don't just pay £1K because someone asks for it, you look at quotes, and you work with the insurer.

SpinyCrevice · 14/06/2016 07:35

Yep - agree with the others. No one has something bad happen to them they consider someone elses fault. Get loads of work done without involving that someone else and then randomly expect that someone else to cough up a four figure sum. That is not how the law works in Britain. Don't know where you are Joanne ?

Egosumquisum · 14/06/2016 07:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

QOD · 14/06/2016 07:55

We had this once! Elderly lady below didn't tell us for over a fucking year that every fucking time we emptied our bath, water ran down thru her kitchen ceiling and wall
Eventually it fell in

A few months later a freehold
Landlord inspection showed it all up. We refused point blank
To pay due to her negligence. Was a loose connection on a pipe which we resolved by removed bath panel and tightening
Take advice from YOUR insurer? Do u have legal cover?

QOD · 14/06/2016 07:55

Gaaaa zombie

Notonthelawn · 14/06/2016 07:57

Post this in Legal OP, theres loads of qualified posters on there.

No way woukd I pay it. Its his insurance not yours!

SoupDragon · 14/06/2016 08:28

ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE
ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE
ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE
ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE
ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE
ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE
ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE
ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE
ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE
ZOMBIE ZOMBIE ZOMBIE

confuugled1 · 14/06/2016 08:34

If they are editable word docs, it might be worth going into the documents to check when they were created and when they were edited...

We had a surveyor who was supposed to be sending documents over and had sent a text to say he'd sent them, we never got them. He finally got around to 'resending' them to us the next day - when we checked the document info, turned out he had created them just 20 minutes before the email was sent - and given their brevity, I'm surprised that he actually spent 20 minutes on them! He was very shocked when we pulled him up on his 5 hours worth of work as was his boss...

So if you could see the date that the docs had been created, or edited, you may have an argument that he is fraudulent trying it on and he might want to reconsider his claim...

confuugled1 · 14/06/2016 08:35

argh. started typing answer before the zombie thread alerts appeared and too sleepy to notice original date! Blush

SpinyCrevice · 14/06/2016 08:37

Yep it's a ZOMBIE THREAD Interesting one but zombie all the same!

kirinm · 14/06/2016 10:37

The insurers are also allowed to recover their losses. Are you sure this isn't being covered under a contents policy? I'd imagine an escape of water claim would be a contents issue not buildings and I'm assuming there is no block policy for contents.

Insurers have 6 years in which to pursue a recovery from you. It is perfectly normal for an insurance company to carry out repairs and then pursue the third party. If they choose to pursue you, they'd include his uninsured losses into the claim. Your insurers would inevitably argue betterment (his policy might entitle him to 'new for old' but they don't have a legal right to recover on the same basis) but the suggestion that the claim should've been made against your policy (if it is not the block policy) is wrong. That would only happen if his insurers refused to cover the claim which given it was a no fault claim seems highly unlikely.

You may or may not hear from his insurers and / or their solicitors.

kirinm · 14/06/2016 10:42

Crap, didn't see it was a zombie. Ignore me!

norkmonster · 14/06/2016 21:03

I know this is a zombie thread, but I am concerned that people may act on the advice given by joanne4law.

The case law is clear - but it is not as she says. Rylands v Fletcher has been limited in scope ever since it was decided by the House of Lords in the late 19th century, and its application is very restricted. For there to be any liability in nuisance under Rylands v Fletcher there have to be 3 things proved - there has to be an accumulation of a "dangerous thing", "non-natural user" and "escape of the thing". It has been made abundantly clear in subsequent case law that the brining of water onto property for domestic usage is not non-natural user. Rylands v Fletcher does not apply and there is no strict liability for water leaks in domestic premises. For there to be any liability, negligence would have to be proved. I am afraid that I also would completely disagree with her conclusion that a judge would work on the assumption that someone would know that there was a high probability a leak might occur - judges do not work on assumptions but on evidence, and I would be surprised if any evidence could be brought that would show such a high probability.

If anyone is reading this in a similar position to that the OP found herself in some years ago, please do not rely upon the incorrect analysis and statements of the law made by joanne4law and other managing agents within this thread. Take your own advice, whether through your insurance policy or via a solicitor, before you pay out anything.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page