by altavista22 » Tue Feb 16, 2010 09:34 pm
I recently filed a claim with my insurance company because my radiator leaked into the unit below. Originally, they told me I would have not coverage if I was negligent with regard to the leak. I was not. In fact, after discovering the damage to his unit. My neighbor below called the plumber, without my knowledge, and had him fix it and notified me 2 weeks later that I would be responsible for the damages. I dont dispute that fact, which is why i called my insurance company. They informed me I was covered and that they would send an adjuster to her unit. We are currently waiting to hear from the adjuster with regard to damages, but I had a conversation with my claim rep today and she told me that since I was not negligent I am not liable. This makes no sense to me. If I was negligent then I would have been liable was her explanation to me. Then again, if I was negligent I would have no coverage. This is explicitly stated in my insurance policy. I do not want this to drag on and felt this was certainly an instance where my insurance covered this type of incident. This is why I called and why it was confirmed to me that I had coverage. Please someone help me. I am losing my mind dealing with this the past 3 weeks.
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:01 pm Post Subject:
Then again, if I was negligent I would have no coverage.
The big difference here is no coverage and not liable... two different things. First... you _do_ have liability _coverage_. That means your property policy will provide you a defense in this matter. Now, the only time that defense is going to be a payment is when you are "legally liable" for the damage. In this case you insurance company is saying you are not legally liable (responsible) for the damage to the other person's property so you don't owe them anything. I'm not saying I agree with this but I am just explaining their point of view. The question is... what did you do wrong? Should you have known that the heater was going to leak? Your carriers view is, no. So _you_ are not legally responsible for the property damage to the other person's property. If this person wants to pursue you for the damage then your carrier will provide you with a defense for this.There is the other side of the liability issue... you are responsible for maintaining the heater in good working order. Why did it leak? I'm guessing a pipe or fitting broke or something else wore out. If it was old, then the argument could be that you should have known this and had it replaced. But this is a gray area. Your carrier is free to make this call.
What exactly did your neighbor have repaired by a plumber? I'm confused about this as I thought the plumbing issue was in your home. Did they have your heater repaired _and_ the resulting water damage? If they had your heater repaired then I'd say you owe them for that repair... but let your carrier handle the resulting water damage. Your carrier would not address the repairs to your heater as it's probably wear and tear and if so, not covered under your policy.
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:20 pm Post Subject: follow up
According to the by-laws and condo docs, I am responsible for maintaining and repairing my unit. It also states that, if negligent, I am responsible for damage to other units. I guess I am better understanding my insurance in this matter.
With regard to the other side of liabililty, yes the radiator in my unit is quite old, but I have lived there for 1.5 years and had it checked when I moved in (during the summer). Quite honestly, if the insurance refuses to pay, what should i do? I have spoken to many lawyers and each one has told me, that in their view, I am liable due to the age of the radiator and it would be in my best interest to settle with my neighbor. Thoughts? Thank you TCope.
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:28 pm Post Subject:
You don't need an attorney and don't really need to handle it. If your insurance company denies liability on your behalf, it is then up to your neighbor on how they want to proceed. They can sue you, then your carrier will defend you. Let your insurance company handle it....that is why you purchased the policy.
I do understand that it can make living next to your neighbor difficult. :D
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 11:30 pm Post Subject:
I have spoken to many lawyers and each one has told me, that in their view, I am liable due to the age of the radiator and it would be in my best interest to settle with my neighbor.
You have a few choices. You can sit tight and allow your insurance company to handle the matter. You can pay for the damage and call it a day. You can speak to a supervisor or manager at your carrier and let them know that you feel you are legally liable due to the age of radiator. Ask them to review their information and reconsider their denial of liability. This might be enough for them to change their minds.Personally, I usually don't agree with attorneys about property damage but I'd probably side with them on this one. Having the heater inspected goes a long way to avoiding liability but you still have the age issue. A 3rd party is going to look at the unit owner below you and ask themselves... what did this person do wrong. People are also responsible for replacing old items... even if they are working fairly well. It's not a far stretch to say that is what should have been done with your radiator.
But ultimately it's your carrier that will make their own decision.
The owner below you can either file under their own policy and their carrier can seen recovery if they think it's due or the other party can file suit against you. If they filed suit then your carrier would provide a defense in the matter.
It does not make for good relations with neighbors. Explain that you can't afford to pay for the damage out of your pocket, this is why you have the policy, and unfortunately you cannot control your carrier or dictate their business practices.
Add your comment