Legalised Theft

[Moylesey]

So there's my nice W208CLK parked in the car park at work when a large tile slides off the roof of our leased office and lands in (not on) my nice shiny bonnet.

Contacted the buildings owners and am ensconced in a claim.

I have had a quote of just under £1k for the repairs and have just taken a call from my legal protection agents telling me that unless they can prove negligence I am liable for my excess (£450 ) and any other incidental costs including car hire. They are not hopeful.

For some reason I'm feeling a bit raw about the whole thing and am inclined to find some Jasper Blue gaff and do the job myself...

Insurance. Great until you need to make a claim...

 

[BTB 500]

I thought the whole point of legal protection insurance was recovering your excess from a third party in the event of a claim like this?!

 

[C240Sport97]

tell them that they must have been negligent in ensuring that the building is secure, roof tiles are not meant to fall off

So there's my nice W208CLK parked in the car park at work when a large tile slides off the roof of our leased office and lands in (not on) my nice shiny bonnet.

Contacted the buildings owners and am ensconced in a claim.

I have had a quote of just under £1k for the repairs and have just taken a call from my legal protection agents telling me that unless they can prove negligence I am liable for my excess (£450 ) and any other incidental costs including car hire. They are not hopeful.

For some reason I'm feeling a bit raw about the whole thing and am inclined to find some Jasper Blue gaff and do the job myself...

Insurance. Great until you need to make a claim...

 

[Moylesey]

I thought the whole point of legal protection insurance was recovering your excess from a third party in the event of a claim like this?!

That's what I said!

Apparently not. A tile blown off in the wind is not a negligent tile! It was windy but the roof isn't in the best nick either.

What a 'roof in bad condition' is, is subject to some conjecture. It WAS very windy on the day in question and they're saying that if they use the weather as a defence against negligence we 'are unlikely to be able to prove otherwise'

As I said, legalised theft..

 

[verytalldave]

Consult a solicitor. I dont see why you should be out of pocket over this. Providing you were legally parked, then you must be able to claim full costs against the insurance on the building.

 

[fuzzer]

im srue they would have to prove that they regularly inspected and had a maintenance program for the ongoing repair of the roof.

 

[C240Sport97]

well if they wind was that bad, and they were not negligent in maintaining the roof, then other tiles on the roof, and in buildings nearby would also have fallen off .. were there any?

 

[glojo]

Where does the proverbial 'Act of God' fit into this? It would be handy if someone had previously reported the roof as being in need of repair.

regards
John

 

[Sp!ke]

I dont get this at all.

They are trying to use ignorance as an excuse not to pay damages. (Basically, I didnt know that it was going to happen therefore its not my fault)

Its up to the owner of said property to make sure his roof is sound. If slates come off and cause damage then said owner must be liable - end of, it was his/her duty to make safe) It's his roof that caused the damage, avoidable or not, its still his problem and his liability.

The insurance companies are trying to pull a fast one. Another case where legal representation is representing the needs of the insurers and not you the client (who paid for the extra cover).

Get a proper legal advice.

 

[davidjpowell]

I dont get this at all.

They are trying to use ignorance as an excuse not to pay damages. (Basically, I didnt know that it was going to happen therefore its not my fault)

Its up to the owner of said property to make sure his roof is sound. If slates come off and cause damage then said owner must be liable - end of, it was his/her duty to make safe) It's his roof that caused the damage, avoidable or not, its still his problem and his liability.

The insurance companies are trying to pull a fast one. Another case where legal representation is representing the needs of the insurers and not you the client (who paid for the extra cover).

Get a proper legal advice.

There are a couple of things that you need to be aware of. Most commercial premises tend to be on leases which make tenants responsible for internal and external repairs and insurance. Landlords usually just pass the insurance cost on and take out the insurnace themsleves.

It is therefore possible that your case may be against your employer.

Unfortunately the winds last week were exceptional and it would not be surpirsing to see some damage on many roofs. If whoever is repsonsible for the roof knew that it was defective and did nothing they were in my view negligent. But if they were not aware of the risk (i.e. could not reasonably have expected that tile to fall on your car) they were probably not negligent.

My understanding is that for something to be an 'Act of God' it must be unforseeable. Strong winds were forecasted and therefore forseable!

I think you need to ask for a copy of the policy. If your firm pays the bill you should be entitled. Providing the policy covers third party liability (which it should) you will get the car repaired I would have thought.

Kind regards

David

 

[raymont]

I’m not saying this is how it should be, or even how I’d like it to be, but it’s the way it is.

If the person responsible for the roof is negligent in maintaining the roof then he, or his insurance, pays for the damage to your car. If he was not negligent then that’s what your insurance (together with it’s excess I’m afraid) is for. Suspect proving negligence would be quite tricky if the tile came off during strong winds.

Went into all of this quite carefully when researching possible consequences of trees in my garden coming down and damaging neighbours property.

 

[davidjpowell]

I should add that I strongly suspect that your legal protection agents are not optomistic because they know that they are going to charge a lot of money for their services and than another big bunck of pounds for the hire car - that is the way they operate.

It may be slightly more hassle, but in this instance it may be better to pursue the claim yourself. You may well find that the insurance company feels it woth £1K to avoid Accident Management fleecers getting involved. There will still be an excess and you would need to discuss with whoever is repsonsible for the roof about who is going to foot that bill!

David

 

[Rory]

I have had a quote of just under £1k for the repairs and have just taken a call from my legal protection agents telling me that unless they can prove negligence I am liable for my excess (£450 ) and any other incidental costs including car hire. They are not hopeful.

Why are you engaged with your legal protection agents anyway - are the building owners or their insurers disputing the claim?

If the tile had hit and killed someone, would that be hard luck too?

 

[comports]

I thought "acts of god" were not covered by insurance but the resultant damage was.

i.e. If my arial blew off my roof and hit next door's car, the insurance would not pay for the repair to my arial (as it blew down as an act of god) but it would pay for next door's car as it was hit by an arial (which was not an act of god. (unless it was god's arial and he picked it up and bashed the car with it.. )..?

That's what third party liability insurance is. Are there any signs or notices that say "parking here is at the owners risk"..?

 

[Rory]

I thought "acts of god" were not covered by insurance but the resultant damage was.

Don't think that's correct.

That's what third party liability insurance is. Are there any signs or notices that say "parking here is at the owners risk"..?

Such notices have no meaning in law. The owner cannot evade their public liability.

 

[comports]

I also thought that to be considered as an "act of god" and unavoidable, numerous people in the area had to have suffered from damage caused by the same event. ie If lots of buildings had roof tiles fallen then maybe but if no other building near by seem damaged then it probably would have been an unsecure tile in the first place.

 

[ckember]

can't you get the damage repaired under your insurance and then take the company whose roof it was to the small claims court. I am sure they will settle out of court before getting that far.
Be careful though as your insurer may remove some NCD as it is classed as a fault claim, unless you get the excess back. They did that when my car was broken into, took off 2 years NCD.


Good luck in getting it sorted

 

[raymont]

Third party liability covers liability to third parties. The important word here is liability. If they , the party you are trying to claim against, are not liable they don't pay. They are not liable unless they were negligent. That's why you have to prove negligence. If you cannot prove negligence it's your problem.

If you take them to any court you will have to prove negligence. If you fail you will probably take some hit on costs.

If legal cover won't take it up it's probably because they, the provider of the legal cover, don't think they can win. They only pursue cases with a reasonable chance of success.

 

[Rory]

If you taken them to any court you will have to prove negligence.

Where does the burden of proof fall though - if the tile fell off the roof then would there not be a presumption that it's the building owners fault unless he can demonstrate that he wasn't negligent?

I'm sure the standard answer from any insurance company is B****r Off - but push a bit harder and would they really go to court over a £1000 or so?

 

[raymont]

Your loss isn't enough to make a winning case, it must also be the other side's legal fault. You must have some evidence that they are in the wrong.

If you go to court are you really expecting to turn up, produce no evidence and say it's their fault unless they can prove otherwise?

Not everything is someone's fault. Accidents happen, that's why we have insurance.

If you think it's their fault you are going to have to prove it.