Who is to pay for damage

[Deloni]

A water leak damage question. I live in a flat (i'm the leaseholder) and 4 months ago owner of flat downstairs told the porter to tell me there was a leak coming from my bathroom. The next day I brought a plumber to check my bathroom and kitchen and the plumber said he hadn't found any leak inside my flat, he checked flat downstairs and concluded that water to the flat downstairs was coming from pipes on the outside of the building (i.e not in my flat) and wrote a letter to owner of flat downstaris along these lines.
4 months later I received a letter from managing agent saying that owner of flat downstairs had complained saying that I hadn't done anything to repair the water leak (which was still on but I hadn't been made aware of after the plumber checked my flat). Managing agent quickly sent a different plumber to my flat and he found a leak in the bathroom which was fixed immediately. The owner of flat downstairs is not insured, I am, but since my insurers will not accept him putting directly a claim against my insurance policy he's threatening with taking me to court if I don't pay full cost of repairs in his flat. I can prove that as soon as I was made aware of the leak (in both instances) I had a plumber to check the flat. I can also prove that the first plumber concluded that there wasn't a leak and wrote a letter saying that. Can he successfully sue me for a liability claim for damage to his flat? I think he took 4 months to report to managing agent because that flat is empty as he's a landlord and the flat has not been occupied for a long time. Any comments appreciated as I'm very confused. Thanks

[redcrx]

surely any damage to his flat comes under buildings insurance, not contents, which you will all have to have as part of lease agreement.

[Deloni]

but he doesn't have insurance. Reg buildings insurance point, managing agent sent me a letter saying that I was to pay cost of repairs downstairs but when I pointed out that if he'd reported continuation of problem sooner than 4 months after first plumber's checked the damage would have been less and therefore I should not be liable to pay full extent of damage repair; managing agent agreed with that but they (managing agent) seem not to get involved let alone refer to buildings insurance as covering the damage

[bednobs]

what exactly has been damaged? if it's the fabric of the building the buildings insurance will cover it

[Deloni]

From what I understand the flat is empty and the damage is on the wall and ceiling

[bednobs]

then if you have an accidental damage clause on the building's insurance it will be covered

[Deloni]

I do but my insurer says that if flat downstairs had insurance then downstairs insurers could claim against my insurance. The problem is that flat downstairs does not have insurance and therefore my insurers are not going to accept a claim against my insurance policy put by owner of flat downstairs (which is what he's trying to do but since it's going to take him nowhere, as he can't claim directly to my insurers then he's threatening with suing me)

[bednobs]

but if it's a flat with a management company, don't you have group buildings insurance?

[bednobs]

or if that's not the case, can't youclaim against your own insurance for damage that was caused?

[Deloni]

Thanks. I was getting confused between my own insurance policy and the block buildings insurance. I will look into that. Leaving that aside, if somebody can give me some thoughts on chances of him being successful if he took legal action against me it'd be much appreciated

[Deloni]

buildings insurance only seems to cover contents damage for communal areas

[bednobs]

but it's not contents that have been damaged - it's the building

[boxtops]

The buildings insurance will cover damage to buildings (as it says), not to other people's contents. If the building suffers an insured incident (e.g. water damage) the owner or his managing agent should be claiming on the buildings policy, unless it can be proved that you were negligent in letting the water run.
I don't understand some of this. The best way to deal with it (IMO) would be for the flat owner downstairs to write to you claiming cost of repairs, then you don't pay it because liability hasn't been determined, you just sent it all straight to your insurance company asking them to investigate this claim against you. That's what I would do.

[ladybirder]

The leak originated from your flat so you are responsible in my opinion and it should be covered by your insurance not the buildings insurance. Your insurance company should be handling this for you and I would do what boxtops suggest, ie get owner of the damaged flat to claim from you and you pass it to your insurers. I think I would have something to say to the first plumber as well. Once the damp has dried out the damage won't look so bad but it'll probably need the room repainting.

[joko]

hang on...so the first leak wasnt from you, it was from outside...but the second leak was from your bathroom...? so your leak caused damage?

the 4 months is irrelevant really - it was a unnoccupied room and he obviously just didnt notice the problem sooner... you cant fix it if you dont know about it...
he presumably assumed that the plumber coming and your letter meant the leak had been stopped...

the fact that the second time the leak was in your bathroom would make him suspicious about the first leak not being...its a big coincidence...

i woudl suggest you try to go halves...because you are responsible somewhat...

[Deloni]

the answer on the legal position under law of tort and negligence seems to be on whether I personally was negligent in the sense that I refused to act promptly which he as a plaintiff would have the onus to prove . What I'm looking for is somebody's who's been involved in litigation in a similar scenario to share views/experience. Incidentally out of good will I offered (in writing) to contribute to pay for repairs for part of the damage, but not for all. He point blank refused that offer and seems to want to send me some bill for building works done to his flat which could include anything he fancies done in the flat

[ladybirder]

I don't understand why you want to go to litigation. Let your insurance company sort it, that's what you pay them for.

[BenDToy]

Quite clearly a matter for the block buidlings insurance. That is why you pay it. The damage is to the building, not the contents. And even if it was contents that were damaged, which does not appear to be the case, you are not legally liable. It is his responsibility to have insurance to cover this. The only debate might be around who is liable for any policy excess. Legally I think it would be your neighbour, since he is making the claim. Repair of the leak may not be covered and you may be liable for this.

[wishy123]

A few consolidating comments.

I agree there is in all probability a block policy that will cover the fabric of the building for water damage either from the external pipes or the leak in your bathroom. As the policy is effectively in joint names of all the leaseholders, the question of who may be 'responsible' for the leak is immaterial as the funding of the policy is shared by all, the insurer pays for the damage and nothing further happens.

The second question is whether the flat below has suffered damage which is not covered under the buildings policy (i.e. to its contents), or if for example there is an excess which the occupier of the damaged flat has to pay and tries to claim from you. In order to pursue a claim against you, your neighbour would indeed have to prove negligence on your part - on the basis of your description, you have not been negligent as you have done everything reasonable once the matter was brought to your attention. Therefore your (Contents) insurers (Contents insurance will have a liability extension) will fight any claim that the neighbour tries to make against you. If he sues you, they will instruct solicitors on your behalf to defend his claim. If he wins, they will pay the award and costs on your behalf. If on the other hand they believe you have been negligent (although again on your description I can't see how they would come to this conclusion) they will agree compensation with him without the need to go through the courts.

Either way you will be protected.

[Memore]

my old flat was flooded by flat upstairs as you point out and my insurance paid out and then claimed against the owner of upstairs insurers - I think if they sued and proved your flat caused damage inside to the flat then you are liable my upstairs neighbours caused floods to my flat at least 3 times it was a nightmare but it is the person who has the damage that claims if he is not insured then he will have to sue you. I paid ground rent to the leaseholder but had my own building and contents to ensure that I was covered. what pipes outside a building would put water inside a building apart from guttering?