flyonthewall
Member
We have a long standing claim with the NFUM for a subsidence problem to a house (reported 4 years ago). Loss adjusters have tried every trick not to remedy a drains issue including the drain not being within the risk address and poor maintenance, much to my surprise. After much argument including going to their complaints the issue was sorted. We were close to settling the claim, but it has recently been noticed that subsidence is continuing despite all the obvious causes being removed. We are loathe to accept a cash offer in full and final settlement only to see the repairs break and the house subside further. A local civil engineer looked at the house recently and said the hole thing is suffering subsidence and it is ongoing. He commented that it may be more economical and a better bet (for us and insurers) to demolish and rebuild completely as nearly 1/3 of the house's footprint is to be demolished anyway and the foundations would be more robust if rebuilt. Having read of other people's problems with repairing subsidence I genuinely feel it is a bad idea if the house is still moving (planned down doors are catching the frames after the summer and cracks seem to expanded with some new ones since it became so wet from the start of November 2014).
The last loss adjuster discovered damage which I had not noticed and included this within the repairs schedule. Pointing out the recent discovery of further damage to the firm another more senior colleague has taken over the claim and is now claiming the damage to be historical and older than the policy and he is not prepared to accept the other new items in the claim. He is stating one fitted cupboard and wall paper is older than 15 years old when the policy was taken out but as I understand the tenant and her son redecorated the whole house about 8/9 years ago. I am not sure how to date a cupboard really?
Is this the sort of practice loss adjusters try on? In the past I've found NFUM to be pretty fair on claims or am I just unlucky with this claim because it's fairly big? I'm pretty annoyed we have insured everything on and off our farm with the local office, and not ever grumbled about the premiums which just seem to keep creeping up - I suppose this is how they reward loyalty these days!
The last loss adjuster discovered damage which I had not noticed and included this within the repairs schedule. Pointing out the recent discovery of further damage to the firm another more senior colleague has taken over the claim and is now claiming the damage to be historical and older than the policy and he is not prepared to accept the other new items in the claim. He is stating one fitted cupboard and wall paper is older than 15 years old when the policy was taken out but as I understand the tenant and her son redecorated the whole house about 8/9 years ago. I am not sure how to date a cupboard really?
Is this the sort of practice loss adjusters try on? In the past I've found NFUM to be pretty fair on claims or am I just unlucky with this claim because it's fairly big? I'm pretty annoyed we have insured everything on and off our farm with the local office, and not ever grumbled about the premiums which just seem to keep creeping up - I suppose this is how they reward loyalty these days!