- This topic has 7 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
When we bought our unit ten years ago we decided that insuring its contents was unnecessary. This week a water pipe in the ceiling space above our unit burst and by the time it was fixed carpets and rugs in several rooms were saturated, and subsequently were considered unreastoreable by an experienced moisture control company.
We feel that the body corporate is clearly liable, but understand its insurance policy, whose premium we share, covers repairs to walls and ceiling, but not carpets (contents).
We expect the body corporate to accept its liability and moral responsibility to reimburse us for all repairs and replacements. Time will tell, but what do other owners feel? No doubt several have suffered a similar event.
Comments re not insuring contents are also welcome. We believe it is a side issue only, that the entity which causes damage to property of others is liable and that insurance is a matter which either party chooses to use or not.
-
Replies
-
Did you know you can raise a claim against the strata insurer yourself? You might find that they are a lot less rigid about what is and isn’t covered.
Failing that, I think you’d have a common law claim against the OC. Just because they aren’t insured doesn’t mean they aren’t liable.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
JT is right, but you would have been better off with your own insurance. Your insurer would be working for YOU; you would not be arguing the case against an insurer working for someone else.
(I do not work for an insurance company.)
It’s tricky because to be successful in claiming legal liability you generally need to establish negligence.
Burst common property pipes are usually an event that is not due to OC/BC negligence. And if that’s the case, your chances of wining a claim against the OC/BC on liability grounds will be small.
You can certainly try claiming on the OC/BC’s insurance. But OC/BC insurance policies usually specifically exclude lot contents except for lot fixtures and fittings. Lot carpets and floating floors are usually specifically excluded.
So you’d have to try a claim under the OC/BC’s legal liability cover.
Sometimes it works.
One issue you will find if you claim on the Buildings legal liability insurance is that you may only be able to claim for the depreciated cost of the carpets. If the carpets were in the unit at the time you bought them you then you may find that you will be get relatively little compared to the cost of new carpets. Generally if you want replacement insurance you it has to be specifically stated in the policy.
Oldmabb
Sadly to say that by not taking out contents insurance, you are deemed to be self insured.
That means that you carry the risk for all events to your lot not covered by the OC insurance . As Austman pointed out, you would have to prove negligence on the part of the OC in order to claim on their insurance.
Give it a try claiming on the OC insurance, but expect to be knocked back by the insurance company
Not sure about not having contents insurance – no liability coverage inside and outside of the lot!!?!!
I guess this one comes down to the liability of the owners corp. Have you looked at the relevant legislation to see where you would have a claim?
Not sure about not having contents insurance – no liability coverage inside and outside of the lot!!?!!
Indeed. Contents insurance is useful beyond covering your stuff at home. Most contents insurance policies provide a general liability coverage, even for things like running into someone while riding a bike in another city.
We expect the body corporate to accept its liability and moral responsibility to reimburse us for all repairs and replacements. Time will tell, but what do other owners feel? No doubt several have suffered a similar event.
Assuming no act or omission by the the owners corporation.
If there is no valid claim against the strata insurance policy then you are asking for the strata to self insure for damage in these situations (and all owners to pay/cover this risk).
Hypothetically, would you have the same expectation if it was a three unit strata and you had to pay for 1/3 of your neighbours damaged carpet, rugs etc?
(I’d still try to claim under the strata policy as suggested)