When Simon made a claim for water damage, his insurer asked him to get some quotes for the repairs. But the quotes were very different.
What happened
Simon made a claim with his buildings insurance provider for water damage. His insurer accepted the claim and asked him to provide two quotes for repairs. Each of these quotes came to around £10,000.
The insurer thought some of the work included in the quotes wasn’t necessary – plastering entire walls, for example. The insurer said its own builder thought £6,000 was a more reasonable cost for repairing the damage and was only willing to pay this much. Simon’s policy terms gave the insurer the option to settle the claim by repair or cash payment.
Simon thought this £4,000 difference was unfair and made a complaint to his insurer. When it didn’t change its decision, he brought the complaint to us.
What we said
Firstly, we checked whether Simon’s insurer was offering him the chance to use its own builder to repair the damage, and discovered it wasn’t.
We agreed that his insurer had the right to make that choice, but only if the settlement amount was fair. So, we then looked into that.
The work needed was in two bedrooms and an en-suite bathroom, which the insurer accepted had been water damaged. We contacted one of the builders to ask about the plastering point the insurer had made.
The builder told us that repairing patches of the plaster was unlikely to work. There was a high risk that the new plaster wouldn't bond correctly with the old plaster.
After speaking with everyone involved, we thought that the insurer’s offer wasn’t fair. It wasn’t offering to do the work, so the cost of its own builder wasn’t relevant. Plus, we disagreed that Simon’s quotes included any unnecessary work.
We chose to uphold Simon's complaint. The two quotes suggested that the realistic market price for Simon was around £10,000. We told his insurer this was what his cash settlement should be based on.