£800 buildings insurance for 2 bed flat?

[insurancedrama]

So..I have a 2 bed upstairs flat as part of a house conversion. Subsidence started a few years ago. Managing agent and insurance company are fannying about. Tenants moved out after about a year as claim wasn't moving forward very fast. I had reduced their rent as there were some cracks. There is some water ingress now so I don't feel it's right to rent it out. Insurance are charging £2.5k (split between 3 flats for buildings only, excluding subsidence. As my flat has now been empty for more than 12 months, my cover is limited to FLEA only, so of pretty much no value. As much of the delay has been down to the insurers, can I contest this? I feel like everyone else is fannying about and I'm suffering the cost.

Very unusual for insurers to exclude subsidence with an ongoing claim. Are you sure a claim has been submitted? If it has I would expect monitoring of the cracks and underpinning if it is in fact subsidence.
I would suggest it is probably the managing agent doing most of the fannying!
As for FLEA perils I highly doubt you will get overturned as your flat is empty and insurers don't like that.
Unfortunately with a potential subsidence claim and an unoccupied flat there won't be many insurance options available

Very unusual for insurers to exclude subsidence with an ongoing claim. Are you sure a claim has been submitted? If it has I would expect monitoring of the cracks and underpinning if it is in fact subsidence.

Brokers said as subsidence is already an ongoing claim, this won't be covered. Insurance companies will need certificate to show property is structurally sound once subsidence works are done (if that ever actually happens). Are brokers wrong on this?
Monitoring etc has happened and damage is down to neighbouring trees and vegetation.
I would suggest it is probably the managing agent doing most of the fannying!
True. It is. Insurance have been slow to respond and have needed lots of chasing too. For the last year managing agents have pulled their finger out.
As for FLEA perils I highly doubt you will get overturned as your flat is empty and insurers don't like that.
I understand. They agreed to overturn decision last year. As it's now been empty for more than 12 months, they don't like it at all! My argument was that if they responded in a timely fashion without continual chasing, that things could have been sorted sooner and flat wouldn't have been empty for 12 months! Do I have a leg to stand on on that front?
It's also that the cost is split 3 ways, so I have a vastly increased premium cost that is of pretty much no good to me. If they are only doing FLEA, surely there are cheaper options available?
Unfortunately with a potential subsidence claim and an unoccupied flat there won't be many insurance options available

I don't think you'll get anywhere about wanting more than flea cover because they've been fannying about. They won't take that into account here. They will literally just go by the amount of time it's been unoccupied for.

It is possible to go elsewhere and get a quote. You will have to make sure you get a company which covers non standard situations but there are companies out there who cover a property which has had subsidence and an outstanding claim.

@insurancedrama the brokers aren't necessarily wrong but it is very odd for an insurer to withdraw subsidence cover where they are currently dealing with a claim.
They should be fixing the damage caused by trees and ensuring the property is structurally sound. Have they instructed anyone to undertake the works?
If you're not happy about how the insurer or broker has managed the claim you can complain to the financial ombudsman. There will also be a clause in the policy wording relating to arbitration which can be invoked if you cannot agree on the claim. The issue will be the policy is in the managing agents name and whilst your interest will be noted the MA are the ones dealing with the broker.

Unfortunately there are unlikely to be any cheaper options. The FLEA cover is in place due to unoccupancy and no other insurer is going to want to take on the risk for less money. Are the other flats in the block occupied? If they are you could push back to the insurer? I suspect which insurer it is and if it's who I think they probably won't budge.

I took the OP to mean that that there is a subs cover ongoing but it's come up for renewal and that's when they've put in a clause excluding subs cover from then...

Unless I've read it wrong...

The neighbours have not wanted to remove trees/vegetation so that's been fun. A tree has now been removed. Insurance said to go down legal route for vegetation, but have now changed their minds and will come up with an alternative proposition. That has been reason for some delay, but deadlines have not been adhered to. Brokers changed insurers last year (yes, mid-claim). Managing agents did not tell brokers place was empty (tenants moved out dec 19). Policy started Jan 2020. I believe this was deliberate as I had a specific conversation about how would property being empty affect insurance with same person from management agency who deals with the brokers. They denied this. I had something in writing to another member of staff, but can't prove the other conversation. I only spotted the insurance change when sent the insurance summary. Insurance eventually said they would provide cover subject to some conditions. Other than a tree being cut down, we are no further forward than then. A recent example of a delay was five weekly emails being sent to ask for an update. It is painfully slow. The other flats are occupied - one is very long term renter (nervous about being rehoused in a lower end property) and one is an owner.

Insurance is Axa. Switched from Allianz.

@arthurdaly sorry meant to tag you in last response. Also, what do you mean by push back to insurer?

Are insurers not carrying out underpinning or if the tree has been removed, remedial works? It isn't fair to leave the building uninhabitable and I would be reverting to the FOS on this point.

I can see why subsidence would be excluded given the ongoing issue.

I'm afraid I don't know anything about landlord insurance but you should be pushing for remedial works and / or removal of vegetation. It is a slow process legally (i.e. getting another party to remove things) but your insurer should be doing something to ensure the building is stable and if they aren't the FOS is your best bet.

I'm waiting to see what robust remedial repairs are going to be offered. I'm nervous as they've not been great and I don't know the right questions to ask to ensure property will be structurally sound. Suddenly there is an alternative to removing the vegetation - which wasn't the case in the report. Last year they said they'd send out a contractor to scope robust repairs (radio silence) and didn't think a tree should be removed. They've conceded on the tree, but are now saying vegetation isn't necessary to be removed. I am awaiting their updated proposals.

Are they still monitoring? You could ask for a copy of the structural engineers report and possibly aborist report. How long has it been since the tree was removed? They might want to keep an eye on settlement now the roots will be dying.

Don't worry about challenging your insurers. You pay them and if they're being slow, you have a right to complain. They won't suddenly stop doing what they're obliged to do. If the FOS thinks your complaint is reasonable, they will require your insurer to take certain steps and will make sure it happens within a reasonable timeframe.

There could be an alternative to removing the vegetation especially if they're meeting resistance from whoever owns it. An alternative doesn't mean that it isn't going to work. I've worked on subs cases (lawyer) and often an insurer's engineer will recommend complete removal but the other side may obtain their own evidence and suggest an alternative which will then be agreed by the insures (or not if they don't agree).

Thanks for your help. The delays have had a heavy financial impact on me. It's a mixture of managing agents and insurance. Can I get any financial compensation? It's so frustrating that I have no control over the delays and that no one is being held to account. Monitoring stopped a while ago. Think over a year (it's in neighbours property as I don't have outside access). Tree was removed a couple of months ago - last year the insurance said tree removal was suddenly no longer necessary but have now had it removed. I will ask about monitoring for tree. It's the insurance company who have backtracked on vegetation removal.

@insurancedrama ah well there's one of the issues the insurance was moved to an alternative insurer whilst a claim was ongoing. Unless Allianz declined to renew the broker was silly to move to a different insurer who, yes would definitely have excluded subs cover and restricted cover to FLEA.
Obviously I don't know why that was done but I would have worked with the previous insurer to get the claim sorted and pushed for full cover on your flat.
Unfortunately managing agents are generally useless when it comes to arranging insurance and rarely understand what's the best course of action.
Right now I don't think you have many options other than pushing the previous insurers to speed up the claim and having a word with the managing agent about why the moved to an another insurer. As mentioned you could write to FOS and they can investigate.

Good luck

They said they moved as they thought it was a better insurer. I've been promised revised proposals in place of vegetation removal by the end of the week. I've raised the monitoring of the impact of tree removal so thanks for that. It's so tiring continually chasing.