Insurance have declined drain/drive way claim

[indus]

Hi
I recently noticed that some of my clay pavers had dropped to the left and right of my manhole. It's now worse than the pics show.
The drain cover was lifted and there were roots everywhere. There was also displaced sand which had blocked the sewage.

My insurance company sent around their drains assessors who cctved the drains (EXCEPT the one with the roots emerging) and also put water/dye down all my drains.

They concluded that roots had grown through a redundant pipe (no water emerged from here during the tests) and that pipe had also collapsed as a result of the roots. That then has caused sand to be displaced and cause the blockage of sewage and movement of pavers.

Accidental damage by roots IS covered by my insurance. However they say that because the redundant pipe should have been capped off they deem it 'poor installation' and so denied the claim.

The guy who laid my drive (13 years ago) took a look and suggested that the 'redundant pipe' may actually be a stench/stink pipe and so an integral part of the design of drainage/sewers at the time my house was built (1902)

Can anybody advice whether I have a leg to stand on with my insurance company? It's going to be quite a few thousand £s to fix.

Thank

you

 

[Bosswhite]

I would have thought that the redundant pipe was a vent pipe , judging by the age of the property , is there any evidence nearby that suggests such . a metal vent cap somewhere in a flower bed.
Maybe first Port of call would be the Water Board to check if this pipe is really redundant

 

[indus]

I would have thought that the redundant pipe was a vent pipe , judging by the age of the property , is there any evidence nearby that suggests such . a metal vent cap somewhere in a flower bed.
Maybe first Port of call would be the Water Board to check if this pipe is really redundant

Thank you.
May I ask

1) Why do you think it's a vent pipe? And by vent I assume you mean venting of gases?

2) Should a vent pipe be capped off? ie if it is a vent pipe I can then argue with the insurers that it never needed to be capped

There is a massive hedge just a few feet away from the man hole. The problem is it is very thick so if it's in there it would be very difficult for me to find.

Appreciate your help buddy.

 

[^woody^]

Redundant (ie not currently in use) or not, it's still part of the system so potentially still covered if it is connected to the manhole..

What are the actual policy words regarding drain cover?

Who owns the tree/shrub that the roots are coming from?

Do you agree with the CCTV layout, in that it does represent all your drains and connections - ie if the pipe is redundant, what has taken it's place?

 

[Bosswhite]

Search Post " Old Fashion Soil and Waste Pipe " November 2016
It was discussed there .

 

[tel765]

As above, if the high inlet is a "redundant" drain what was it draining? A rain water gulley?
And its not an interceptor trap.
Are all the roots are coming from the redundant inlet - without seeing the full manhole and its orientation to the drive/house its difficult to tell?

OP,
Whatever happens with the insurance business, and all i know about buildings insurers is that they try it on, and then somewhat - fight back, dont just accept what they say.
By the way, from the info & pics so far, what you have is a simple blockage or blockages - an everyday job to dig out and replace/repair the drainage.
Agree with the neighbour's and remove the offending shrubs.
Patio brick people could re-instate the surface in a few hours.
Its definitely not a "thousands" of pounds job. Its mostly about digging & those who dig for a living deserve every penny, so its not cheap.

 

[indus]

Redundant (ie not currently in use) or not, it's still part of the system so potentially still covered if it is connected to the manhole..

What are the actual policy words regarding drain cover?

Who owns the tree/shrub that the roots are coming from?

Do you agree with the CCTV layout, in that it does represent all your drains and connections - ie if the pipe is redundant, what has taken it's place?

Hi Woody
Drain damage is covered for ''accidental damage". Accidental is defined as

Instead accidental damage uses a variety of damage, such as; damage by tree roots, ground movement, vehicle pressure, physical damage, damage from a water leak, and also solid obstruction.

I was present when they conducted the CCTV/inspection. His goal throughout was to prove that the suspect pipe was redundant and that all the other pipework was working satisfactorily. He did this by CCTV inspection from the manhole towards the house and same from manhole towards street. He then poured dye down the surface drains present on my drive to prove that they emptied into the manhole but NOT via the suspect pipe.
I have one rainwater drain down the side access of my property that actually services my neighbour. He checked that also ran somewhere other than the suspect pipe as well

So, his conclusion was that the suspect pipe is redundant, should have been capped etc

I have attached their complete response.

Search Post " Old Fashion Soil and Waste Pipe " November 2016
It was discussed there .

Thanks, have tried to search with those terms but nothing comes up

As above, if the high inlet is a "redundant" drain what was it draining? A rain water gulley?
And its not an interceptor trap.
Are all the roots are coming from the redundant inlet - without seeing the full manhole and its orientation to the drive/house its difficult to tell?

OP,
Whatever happens with the insurance business, and all i know about buildings insurers is that they try it on, and then somewhat - fight back, dont just accept what they say.
By the way, from the info & pics so far, what you have is a simple blockage or blockages - an everyday job to dig out and replace/repair the drainage.
Agree with the neighbour's and remove the offending shrubs.
Patio brick people could re-instate the surface in a few hours.
Its definitely not a "thousands" of pounds job. Its mostly about digging & those who dig for a living deserve every penny, so its not cheap.

Thank you. I think the insurers are trying to say that it doesn't drain anything anymore, that's their whole argument.

The guy who originally did my drive (13 years ago) has quoted me £4.5k!! They are a well established local firm. They are known to be a bit pricey but this quote took my breath away. Taking the mickey unless I'm missing something.

 

[^woody^]

Hi Woody
Drain damage is covered for ''accidental damage". Accidental is defined as

Instead accidental damage uses a variety of damage, such as; damage by tree roots, ground movement, vehicle pressure, physical damage, damage from a water leak, and also solid obstruction.

I was present when they conducted the CCTV/inspection. His goal throughout was to prove that the suspect pipe was redundant and that all the other pipework was working satisfactorily. He did this by CCTV inspection from the manhole towards the house and same from manhole towards street. He then poured dye down the surface drains present on my drive to prove that they emptied into the manhole but NOT via the suspect pipe.
I have one rainwater drain down the side access of my property that actually services my neighbour. He checked that also ran somewhere other than the suspect pipe as well

So, his conclusion was that the suspect pipe is redundant, should have been capped etc

I have attached their complete response.



Thanks, have tried to search with those terms but nothing comes up




Thank you. I think the insurers are trying to say that it doesn't drain anything anymore, that's their whole argument.

The guy who originally did my drive (13 years ago) has quoted me £4.5k!! They are a well established local firm. They are known to be a bit pricey but this quote took my breath away. Taking the mickey unless I'm missing something.View attachment 211478

It looks like from the wording, that the firm (Auger, a specialist drainage firm.) were commissioned by the insurer (LV) to investigate the drains. And yet it is Auger who state that they are declining the claim.

That alone is wrong. The third party can't decline the claim or agree it, just comment on what they find.

 

[KenGMac]

As above, I totally agree with "woody" the contractor "Auger" are not your Insurer, OK they work for and on behalf of the Insurer, they will have what is called in the Insurance Industry as a "DA" that is a Delegated Authority where if it is [in the opinion of Auger] there is a blockage that can be cleared in the main line they will proceed to undertake the work there and then rather that wait for several days on Insurers approval to proceed??

One possible flaw in Augers argument is that dirt and debris, sand Etc. is coming out of a "Redundant pipe" ?? how, it will take some water flow to move this material out of the so called redundant pipework, which is blocked with roots

When I instruct a CCTV survey I want all drains traced, cleared and surveyed.

As for cost of clearing the so called redundant drain?? what is normal practice in insurance claims I deal with is that the offending drain is jetted, as far as practical, CCTV to see what is going on and if needed a root cutter, jetting and CCTV to ensure the drain is in tact, that is the drain has not collapsed then fit a liner. Last option is to excavate and replace, unless there is a total collapse of the drain.

Suggest you contact your Insurer and make a "Formal Complaint" about the decision made by Auger.

If the Insurer runs true to the script for this sort of situation [been there got a load of T shirts] The Insurer will back up there preferred Contractor Insurers do not like spending cash?? If declinature is maintained by insurer, do not muck about, make a complaint DIRECT to the CEO !!

Ken.

 

[Ian H]

If the pipe is redundant there is no point in repairing it so you might as well cap it off now.

It’s also unlikely to be the cause of your sunken blocks.

I would get a price off another drive company to lift and relay the sunken sections, I’d be thinking hundreds, not thousands.

 

[tel765]

The odds are that the collapsing "redundant" pipe will be abandoned. Over time it will continue to collapse along its length - so whatever else happens then the pipe will probably have to be dug out, & the trench made good.

There are a number of oddities about this simple job - some/most have been mentioned above - i did notice one or two more. However, i've been educated, and look forward to what happens next with pictures.

 

[Nige F]

[
.[/QUOTE]
Given the position of the manhole near the front boundary, and the position of the "vent" pipe (plus the hedge) I conclude that it IS an interceptor trap ( sorry ted) As said the redundant pipe runs to what was once an air inlet , with a metal head at low level near your boundary. Unfortunately this does not augur well for your claim as the inlet head was probably lost long ago.

 

[HERTS P&D]

I would get a price off another drive company to lift and relay the sunken sections, I’d be thinking hundreds, not thousands.

There is someone on here called Keitia, who does block paving.

Andy

 

[HERTS P&D]

Indus, post a picture looking into the manhole.

Andy

 

[indus]

Indus, post a picture looking into the manhole.

Andy

Good morning Andy.

Does this help?

Thank you