Making an insurance claim

Hi, my neighbour has informed me my shower is leaking into his bathroom below. His insurance company are telling him he has to claim via my insurance directly and not via his insurance, is that correct?

This happened to us too. We contacted our insurer (Liberty Seguros) and they did all the necessary work in our apartment and made repairs downstairs too.

Andy, in the UK there is legislation to make it clear that unless there is gross negligence there is basically no liability on anyone.  The rationale being twofold, that with flats (etc) it's too commonplace and the powers that be don't want the courts to be blocked by petty small amounts and sometimes you cannot be sure where the leak comes from.

RICS have issued some legal guidelines generally used in the property sector, which includes this item where the advice is that the Freeholder should meet the repair cost and charge it out under the Service Charge to all leaseholders.

I don't know the situation in Spain, the standard of training and legal understanding is far lower - although it seems that Liberty Seguros are more enlightened.

Your neighbours insurer is wrong.  They should meet the cost of your neighbours repair themselves (that's what they pay the premium for!!!).  The insurer then have the right to subrogate against you to recover their outlay.  In the UK they would not even try, in Spain...?  
 

UK law and legislation does not apply to Spain.

I do not understand how your neighbour can make a claim on a policy that he/she is not the policy holder. I think your neighbour is getting the usual insurance fob off.

Kavanagh, if you look carefully you will see that in the first few words of my post I stated " in the UK".  I know you are a fine fellow and the last person on EOS to make a fuss about nothing, but possibly on this unique occasion you may possibly have stated the "bleedin obvious".

You say "I do not understand how your neighbour can make a claim on a policy that he/she is not the policy holder".  This may be as you do not have the relevant experience...

However the standard approach is for the freeholder to effect insurance cover on behalf of all interested parties in the building to comply with his/her obligations under the lease.  The policy is issued with a suitable interest clause and the premium is allocated to the leaseholders in the Service Charge.  Effectively all interested parties become joint insureds with equal rights under the policy. 

No doubt you can tell me that you know of hideous variations, I can only mention the correct approach.

Hello Acer 

In this particular case your statement makes no sense.

‘’Hi, my neighbour has informed me my shower is leaking into his bathroom below. His insurance company are telling him he has to claim via my insurance directly and not via his insurance, is that correct?’’

Good Morning Kavanagh,

You have effectively posed a "how long is a piece of string" question.   You've not given the basic, necessary info to comment eg what country is involved?  Is this a residential block of flats?  Full details on the actual cause of the leak.

You cannot comment without knowing the true facts, unless your name is Sergey Lavrov.

I'm not going to spend time in participating in a meaningless exchange, if you have a genuine query please take a few moments to provide proper details.

Hello Acer 

This is Eye On Spain, so it would be reasonable to assume that the original poster (OP) is referring to a property in Spain. 

If you require more details about the property you should request it from the OP and not me.

Hi, my neighbour has informed me my shower is leaking into his bathroom below. His insurance company are telling him he has to claim via my insurance directly and not via his insurance, is that correct?

Some years ago a local body shop and garage burnt down with quite a few customers cars inside getting burnt out, I had a couple of customers come to me to replace these cars, conversation went why they were not claiming from the body shops insurance because they were inside,  told they had to claim of their own insurance,  their insurance then claimed of the body shops insurance, seems a round about way to do things but thats how it was, downside was they never got full market value and the body shops insurance told them they got paid out whats the problem? Insurance companies, love them or hate them I suppose.

Folk often blame the big bad insurer when often they are just following the law.  Baz1946, in the example you gave the garage operator is legally termed a "baillee" and can often, depending on circumstances, be legally liable for loss or damage to customers' goods in the garages custody.

The further quirk of the law you mention is "subrogation", whereby under English law the insurer has the legal right to "stand in the shoes" of their insured to avail themselves of their rights to recover their outlay.  So justice is done.

I agree totally with your final comment, I don't believe the insurance sector explains itself too well.  But in fairness, many folk are too bored to listen.

English law does not apply in Spain.

Kavanagh,

3 quick points:

~ you leep on repeating that, parrot style 

~ I didn't ever say it did.

~ many legal systems around the world are based on and follow English Law.  So usually it's a good starting point.

This forum is Eye on Spain (EOS). Spain is a sovereign country and has it’s own laws and legal system. Referring to laws of another county like England or Sharia law is misleading and confusing to readers. Britannia no longer rules the waves.

Let’s make Spanish law a good starting point.

Have you ever heard ‘’when in Rome’’? but please don’t quote Italian law, they are not even in the world cup and Caesar Augustus is long gone.

Kavanagh,

You are talking nonsense.

Whilst their origins are largely from the in the UK these are examples of legal doctrine that are now embedded in business and society all over the world.   

If you google the two terms "Bailee" and "Subrogation" mentioned you might learn something.

acer

There is no need for personal insults. Please DO NOT RETALIATE WITH ABUSE.

Kavanagh,

I did not abuse you in any way.  No doubt if you really thought so you would have flagged it with the EOS Moderator.

I merely sort to correct your misunderstanding of the situation.  My post was to provide a meaningful reply to Baz1946's question.  It was factual and intended to be helpful - so I do not believe that your sniping was justified.

Perhaps you might wish to consider some of your own posts? 
 

*Opening old thread alert*

Just back from my recent visit and was speaking to the vice president of the community about this. He has said it is the property owner's insurance that is liable in this case. He came home to find his water heater had burst and flooded his apartment, the one downstairs and the ground floor too. It was his insurance that had to pay for the deumidifiers, re- plastering and decorating of the affected properties. Liekwise, another resident who had a leak from a washing machine that was dripping for many months before the damp patch appeared in the property below.

Another owner however had the soil pipe back up and explode in their apartment, taking out the 2 downstairs as well (lovely site/ smell to behold, i'm sure), that was all handled by the community insurance, even though it was found to be caused by wet wipes and no building fault..

Mark

I reckon that law generally is difficult to predict, even more so in Spain where they don't always follow the legal precedent system that we do in the UK.  A few years ago Rylands v Fletcher was the leading case in the UK which imposed a wide strict liability for owners where escape of water was involved. 

Now in blocks of flats in the UK these incidents tend to be swallowed up and allocated to the Service Charge, where there is no negligence that can be attached.  For me this is a more civilised approach.  In Spain...who knows...