We have had a burst water main where the pipe was thread through the foundations! Our claim for remedial work has been accepted but there is a £1000 excess on subsidence claims.

Can it be argued that this is not subsidence but the result of the burst water main?

Thank you

Have they said that this is a subsidence claim ?

Which Insurer are you with?

What caused the pipe to burst ?

What are the Insurers covering exactly (what repairs)?

'Subsidence damage caused by an escape of water from the mains water pipe running under property.'

Old age!

Rendered wall had cracks, some old, some new from leak; covering part repair of new cracks.

Have a look at your policy to see where you think the claim is covered.

If the pipe was old and this was the reason for the burst, then the Insurers would not cover the actual pipe, as this would be considered wear and tear, so a maintenance issue.

It was only that that the water had caused a subsidence issue that they dealt with the claim under the subsidence peril, subject to the excess.

Hi

Thanks for your comments.

This has been ongoing for a few weeks. Initial claim was made over damege to patio while pipes were being repaired and settlement reached.

When surveyor was shown where the pipe was, he stated that although some of damage to rendering was old, there were fresh cracks due to the burst main.

I think you'll have a hard job convincing anyone otherwise, if it was an escape of water claim, you'll need to demonstrate all the damage was caused in one singular incident.

The gradual wash of water has probably caused the foundations to wash away, hence the property subsiding.

It's up to you to prove otherwise, as no doubt the insurers have appointed a subs engineer to confirm all. You could spend upto £1k on getting a report from a chartered engineer to tell you the same.

I assume you have challenged this with the insurer? there is no harm in doing this, asking them for the courtesy of a convincing response.

Good luck, let us know how you get on.