Thread: Household insurance

G'Day "artme",
Maybe it's worth having a talk to the Queensland Government Fair Trading office
and ask them the questions.
Hopefully, if you get a decent people in the office,
you'll get a fair shake and the correct advice.
I've got my insurance with Defence Service Homes
and they're so far been very good.
Cheers, Crowie

Originally Posted by artme

Since the trouble with a leaking roof caused by tradesmen not replacing removed tiles I have been susing out aspects of household insurance.
A number of points have arisen that we should all take note of:

!. Damage as a result of faulty workmanship or negligence by a third party.
My insurance company knocked back my claim on the grounds that the problem was casued by fualty workmanship/negligence on the part of tradesmen, While the rain actually caused the damage, the primary cause was the gaping hole left by the workmen.

2. In the above case the insurance company will not carry out the repair and then pursue the installers.

3. I have been told by a couplle of people that I should have a workers' compensation component in my household insurance. I would have thought that the company employing the workers, or the workers themselves are obliged to carry such insurance. This one is a little tricky. If the workers are sole traders, you as the home owner are deemed to be the employer. Also, if they are "employees", and there's a problem with the employer's workers comp insurance, you as the "contract principal" can be held liable. The legal principal is about protecting workers from shonky employers by (when needed) chasing compensation from further up the engagement chain.

4. When making a claim on a company for repairs as a result of damage caused by faulty workmanship/negligence, does the company have the right to vet my claim before it gets to the insurer? Yes. You don't know how much the company needs to spend before they even can call on the insurer. Depending on the size of the company, I'd not be surprised if the company had to pay the first $5,000 of any claim.
Does the company have the right to investigate the claim and pass information on to the insurer. Yes. You don't know if the company will even make a claim on their insurer. Besides, the insurer expects the company to make an initial assessment.
I would have thought that the company's insurer would investigate, assess and decide on the claim. The last big claim I dealt with (>$5M), it was a year and a half after the event before the insurer became involved.

snip
i'd like the thoughts and experiences of others to be aired on this subject.

ian

Artme,


In respect to points 3 & 4 I fully agree with what Ian said, in fact you may even find that shonky or small businesses might not even have any insurance to cover their crook work. In my experience quite a few small businesses did not have any insurance for their potential liabilities, if their was a major claim they would move on and later resurrect themselves as another new business. Remember the posts on that caravan maker a little while back.

Post 5 & 6 cover the same principle that you have to make sure that all efforts are made to avoid the claim and that damage is not caused by your actions.

In regards to no 7 it depends if you can show documented proof that it is built in accordance with standards, council regulations (& permits if needed) and in a proper and workman like manner. Hence WIP posts with pictures on this board is such a great way of preserving such proof.

Sadly with these things it's always "buyer beware" and I would strongly advocate checking the fine print of any contract, insurance or otherwise, and delay payment for work done until satisfied as to the proper workmanlike finish. If necessary get someone (a neighbour, friend or relative) in to help you make that assessment.


Peter.

Hi Artme,

Sorry to hear you appear to have suffered at the hands of others who didn't do the job correctly. Each of the points you have made has validity and each is clearly covered under the well established principles of insurers, or their retail agents more often, dealing with insurance claims.There is a clear procedural protocol for this process. Best to talk with your Broker or the company you arrange your insurance through about exactly where you stand in relation to this particular case plus the overarching principles that apply. To debate the merits of this on this forum will bring a lot of 'bush lawyers' out of the thick undergrowth and will contribute very little to nothing at all!

On the topic of insurance and following a different tack there would be very many forumites I suspect who in good faith believe their precious tools and machines and timber stock are covered by their household contents insurance. Most household contents policies severely limit the amount of loss that may be claimed for items classed as tools of trade; generally to $1000.

It doesn't matter whether or not you operate commercially: if you want your gear to be covered for anything approaching its value you will need to take out a commercial policy and that normally requires you to operate in a prescribed and sensible fashion for dust management, provision of fire extinguishers, flammable good storage, spraying flammable solvent based polishes and separate and independent electrical isolation of the premises. All this I discovered two years ago when I went to renew our household insurance and the insurer declined to continue to cover the risk for my workshop contents ( but not the workshop structure itself which is a stand alone building).

I deemed that I couldn't risk not being insured for the workshop contents so I took on commercial insurance. Others may feel differently but I suggest that most people in this position who are relying on household contents cover need to check with their broker just where they stand in the event of a claim.

Good Luck,

Old Pete