Hi everybody this is my first contact , need some advice.

Problem with Esure buildings insurance see what you guys think.

My front garden wall has been vandalised by some yobs who have somehow managed to breakdown the wall which now sits in my front garden. My policy states that I am insured 13.Riot, civil commotion, labour andpolitical disturbances, vandalism and acts of malicious people.

I was on holiday at the time but my neighbour called the police, who couldn't find the vandals and not surprisingly have not been able to investigate further to find the criminals.

OK the real problem is I thought my wall would have been insured by Esure they sent an assessor round and he deemed the wall not to be in a well maintained manner, made a report and Esure are reverting to General exclusions wear and tear or loss of value over time.

To me maybe a bit biased this could just about cover everything in my household unless its brand new., I also have contents insurance with them.

Just wanted to know if anybody has fought a decision like this as I think they have got round the vandalism by saying the wall wasn't a well maintained wall, and like a lot of insurance companies are trying to get out of paying out. I am looking to go the whole hog on principle alone.

Just wanted to know if CAG has any pointers.

Thanks

Hello browndante4321, welcome to the CAG.

Enjoy your visit, but take some time to look around the forum and understand where everything is.

It can seem confusing at first but you will start to find your way round and to understand what a helpful community we are.

You haven't received any replies to your post yet. Try posting your query again in a relevant sub-foum. You will get the help and support you need there.

Thanks for the reply I will post in proper sub forum.

Hi brown

Welcome to CAG

The guys will be happy to advise as soon as they are available.

Thread moved to the correct forum.

Apologies, I can't give a straight answer.

This is one of those conundrums, the wall (and any wall) should have been strong enough to not be pushed over, so the wear and tear allowed it to be pushed over. However the wall was pushed over and didn't collapse because of the wear and tear (just fall down) and may have sat in its state of wear and tear doing it's wall job for many years to come.

The insurer would have to prove that the wall was in such as state it would need immediate repair in its pre accident condition and could not carry out its role as a wall in the near future.

Ask them to reconsider their stance before going into complaint, ask them to provide the evidence their basing their assessment upon.

Thanks for the warm welcome guys I love the advice we give each other on forums. I will write to them and see if they can give me the evidence in writing as to what they based the conditition of the wall on, as I have an adjacent wall that was built at the same time which is still in a very strong condition. My whole point is though they just seem to disregard that fact that the wall was vandalised and just couldn't have been pushed over easily, my neighbour reckons there was 7-8 lads outside trying to pull it down , unfortunately a bus stop is right outside my house.