Had a burst plumbing T joint in a rental, the registered plumber has stated in writing that it was a burst T joint.
AMI sent a building company to assess, the building company said that it has been a slow leak because the gib is sodden wet and mould is present.

The burst T joint caused water to cush out of the weatherboards. This could have been the case for a week as the place was vacant. The gushing water was discovered by a handyman that went there to do a job.
The two story property is the end unit of a block and sits in a damp Southwest corner, clad with porous concrete block and timber boards.

AMI only want to pay the maximum of $1500 for damage. (Policy only pays maximum of $1500 for slow leak plumbing leaks)

What can be done in this instance please going up against a giant as AMI to see the light ?

houseofdad - 2021-05-20 15:21:00

Sounds like you may have 2 problems there . I have been doing repair jobs and a lot have the healthy homes reports by so called inspectors and most have faults in the reports . Some inspectors have not got a clue what they are doing or they are blind .

martin11 - 2021-05-20 16:00:00

How much is the total damage, mals?

sparkychap - 2021-05-20 16:21:00

The member deleted this message.

deerhurst - 2021-05-20 16:23:00

Actually thinking more about it do you own it but don’t live there? Just to clarify.

Edited by deerhurst at 4:29 pm, Thu 20 May

deerhurst - 2021-05-20 16:25:00

Because according to their site this coverage is only if you where living there not tenants.

https://ami.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/782/~/slow-
leaking-pipe-coverage

deerhurst - 2021-05-20 16:32:00

it could also be put down to normal slow deterioration of pipes etc. I suggest you have no chance of getting your claim accepted.

spead - 2021-05-20 16:38:00

deerhurst wrote:

Because according to their site this coverage is only if you where living there not tenants.

https://ami.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/782/~/slow-
leaking-pipe-coverage

Thats for a private policy, for a landlord policy it's covered:.

Bottom of Page 6.

https://www.ami.co.nz/pdfs/ami_premier-rental-property-pw.pd
f

sparkychap - 2021-05-20 16:42:00

spead wrote:

it could also be put down to normal slow deterioration of pipes etc. I suggest you have no chance of getting your claim accepted.

They've already offered to pay the claim.

sparkychap - 2021-05-20 16:43:00

The issue here, is AMI are saying this is a gradual damage claim, whereas you are saying it is a sudden, accidental claim. The presence of mould would indicate it is gradual in nature. Could there have been a minor leak, that all of a sudden burst and became a major leak?

If you really believe you are in the right and AMI is in the wrong, you can dispute the claim. If it cannot be resolved, you can refer to the insurance ombudsmen for them to decide what the claim should be classed as

phoenix22 - 2021-05-20 16:54:00

sparkychap wrote:

Thats for a private policy, for a landlord policy it's covered:.

Bottom of Page 6.

https://www.ami.co.nz/pdfs/ami_premier-rental-property-pw.pd
f

Thanks for that

deerhurst - 2021-05-20 16:56:00

Based on the information here I agree with AMI. $1500 will cover easy.

msigg - 2021-05-20 17:03:00

I'm in the building trade. We often hear stories about insurance companies not paying out on water leaks and always use the excuse...it has been a long slow leak because there is an appearance of mould. Such an easy way out...mould can appear within 48hours.

richynuts - 2021-05-20 17:05:00

richynuts wrote:

I'm in the building trade. We often hear stories about insurance companies not paying out on water leaks and always use the excuse...it has been a long slow leak because there is an appearance of mould. Such an easy way out...mould can appear within 48hours.

Also OP is blaming the mould on it being a damp, unhealthy home.

sparkychap - 2021-05-20 17:06:00

Had a similar issue and I asked the insurance assessor what am I to do? Rip up the floor boards once a year to check the plumbing. We took the $1500.

landylass - 2021-05-20 18:05:00

Not long ago, we had a similar claim with Vero.
They paid out for the entire bedroom refloored and portion of the entire carpet at that end of the house.
We carpeted the entire end, so they paid the bedroom affected.
We paid the plumber to fix the leak.

smallwoods - 2021-05-20 19:34:00

Often there is a slow leak, before it 'suddenly' bursts, which it sounds like what has happened in your case. If the gib is sodden and there is mould, that doesn't happen overnight, so there was obviously 'something' going on before the burst pipe incident.

The fact it is a damp corner of the property is obviously not related to the sudden event, and likely the cause of mould, which wouldn't be covered by insurance, so TBH, I'd be happy that insurance was covering any of it.

rhys12 - 2021-05-20 21:42:00

msigg wrote:

Based on the information here I agree with AMI. $1500 will cover easy.

How do you know the cost of the actual damage here? Presumably OP is looking to repudiate as it's far more than $ 1,500....

sparkychap - 2021-05-21 07:02:00

Is your problem that AMI are doing exactly what they said they would do in this particular circumstance.. i.e. following the policy or is AMI not doing what you would like for them to do ???

onl_148 - 2021-05-21 09:46:00

richynuts wrote:

I'm in the building trade. We often hear stories about insurance companies not paying out on water leaks and always use the excuse...it has been a long slow leak because there is an appearance of mould. Such an easy way out...mould can appear within 48hours.

Might be worth a case asking for the definition of 'gradual'.

amasser - 2021-05-21 11:24:00

amasser wrote:

Might be worth a case asking for the definition of 'gradual'.

Isn't it evident?

sparkychap - 2021-05-21 11:29:00

sparkychap wrote:

Isn't it evident?

Not to a drip.

ebygum1 - 2021-05-21 12:19:00

AMI will wriggle out of paying claims if they can. I'm with the poster who said go the the insurance ombudsman. You claimed for a sudden burst pipe.

zirconium - 2021-05-21 12:34:00

The member deleted this message.

deerhurst - 2021-05-21 13:51:00

zirconium wrote:

AMI will wriggle out of paying claims if they can. I'm with the poster who said go the the insurance ombudsman. You claimed for a sudden burst pipe.

When I crashed my Mini, I claimed for a Porsche.

sparkychap - 2021-05-22 07:31:00

My son had a leak.....AMI, in the end contributed $600 towards repairs, not the leak itself, but floor repairs.

lythande1 - 2021-05-22 08:20:00

https://www.ifso.nz/ AMI hate them also tell Ami you are laying a complaint with them you will find they will change there tune pretty quick

andrewcg53 - 2021-05-22 09:23:00

Or just tell them you'll go to Fair Go. We'd all watch.

sparkychap - 2021-05-22 09:44:00

sparkychap wrote:

How much is the total damage, mals?

AMI said the builder had quoted over $1500.

What AMI is offering minus my excess is not even 2 months worth of premiums on that block.

I had a builder arranged to go and do repairs then rung AMI and they said we prefer to use our own builder, so their builder went to quote. I would like to know why things are not transparent and they did not forward me his quote.
They want me to accept their offer but I don't know what the total repair cost is. A loss adjuster rung for access to the property so I thought they were going to look at the damage/cause. Looks like only the builder went. The loss adjuster that has been emailing me is called a desktop loss adjuster - has an out-of-province prefix telephone number.

I thought I was insured by AMI but I receive emails from them with their email address ending in @iag.co.nz we all know why that is but talk about an unprofessional look.
It's a sheer conflict of interest the company coming around to assess the cause of damage for the insurer is in bed with the insurer.
(Same dynamics at play for the Christchurch earthquake repairs)

Upshot now after an email is AMI is reconsidering their decision, will keep you all posted.

Edited by houseofdad at 10:34 am, Sat 22 May

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 10:32:00

spead wrote:

it could also be put down to normal slow deterioration of pipes etc. I suggest you have no chance of getting your claim accepted.

Yeah you would think it works that way re slow deterioration of the pipes but to my knowledge doesn't seem to come into it. It's either a gradual leak or burst joints etc.

I've gathered some good points for my case that at this stage AMI seem to be considering.

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 10:43:00

sparkychap wrote:

Thats for a private policy, for a landlord policy it's covered:.

Bottom of Page 6.

https://www.ami.co.nz/pdfs/ami_premier-rental-property-pw.pd
f

What the joke of the policy is they call it a premier policy lollol.

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 10:45:00

phoenix22 wrote:

The issue here, is AMI are saying this is a gradual damage claim, whereas you are saying it is a sudden, accidental claim. The presence of mould would indicate it is gradual in nature. Could there have been a minor leak, that all of a sudden burst and became a major leak?

If you really believe you are in the right and AMI is in the wrong, you can dispute the claim. If it cannot be resolved, you can refer to the insurance ombudsmen for them to decide what the claim should be classed as

My property manager said they could see no mould. Re the mould it can appear in days. Was weeks after the property manager when the builderr got there that made the mould call.

Thank you for the advice, I will be pursuing that course if I'm not paid for full repairs.

Edited by houseofdad at 10:54 am, Sat 22 May

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 10:53:00

richynuts wrote:

I'm in the building trade. We often hear stories about insurance companies not paying out on water leaks and always use the excuse...it has been a long slow leak because there is an appearance of mould. Such an easy way out...mould can appear within 48hours.

Cheers Richy, yes I've read plenty of comments online people saying about the gradual leak way out.
No doubt the leaky pipe clause is installed iso it is a way out. Are we all meant to have x-ray vision to be able to look through wall linings and see leaky pipes ? A leaky pipe is an unexpected event in my book and that's what I thought insurance was for.

Edited by houseofdad at 11:01 am, Sat 22 May

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 11:00:00

smallwoods wrote:

Not long ago, we had a similar claim with Vero.
They paid out for the entire bedroom refloored and portion of the entire carpet at that end of the house.
We carpeted the entire end, so they paid the bedroom affected.
We paid the plumber to fix the leak.

Nice - I think it's just your luck who you get to deal with and the culture of the insurance company helps too. Heard good things about State Insurance and see they owned by the same company IAG.

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 11:05:00

rhys12 wrote:

Often there is a slow leak, before it 'suddenly' bursts, which it sounds like what has happened in your case. If the gib is sodden and there is mould, that doesn't happen overnight, so there was obviously 'something' going on before the burst pipe incident.

The fact it is a damp corner of the property is obviously not related to the sudden event, and likely the cause of mould, which wouldn't be covered by insurance, so TBH, I'd be happy that insurance was covering any of it.

The plumber said the cause was a burst pipe not a slow gradual leak. I'm only wanting from AMI what I'm entitled to. I'm no craftsman plumber but no basic physics, not hard to see why a t-joint would burst under pressure when glue and plastic departs company after time.

As for the mould as said by others it can grow in days.

Edited by houseofdad at 11:13 am, Sat 22 May

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 11:13:00

onl_148 wrote:

Is your problem that AMI are doing exactly what they said they would do in this particular circumstance.. i.e. following the policy or is AMI not doing what you would like for them to do ???

They are not taking the word of a registered plumber that is employed by one of the biggest most well respected plumbing companies in Christchurch, there is no conflict of interest between the plumbing company and I.
But are taking the word of a builder that iis in bed with them on a plumbing matter. As said I am only asking for what I'm entitled to.

Edited by houseofdad at 11:18 am, Sat 22 May

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 11:17:00

zirconium wrote:

AMI will wriggle out of paying claims if they can. I'm with the poster who said go the the insurance ombudsman. You claimed for a sudden burst pipe.

Yeah cheers for the support.

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 11:20:00

sparkychap wrote:

When I crashed my Mini, I claimed for a Porsche.

That sounds about as logical is an insurance company taking the word of a builder to the cause of a plumbing fault over a plumber.

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 11:24:00

andrewcg53 wrote:

https://www.ifso.nz/ AMI hate them also tell Ami you are laying a complaint with them you will find they will change there tune pretty quick

Excellent thank you very much Andrew for the link.

Take it there is only the one insurance ombudsman service in New Zealand and that's the one in the link Andrew gave ?

Edited by houseofdad at 11:27 am, Sat 22 May

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 11:27:00

houseofdad wrote:

That sounds about as logical is an insurance company taking the word of a builder to the cause of a plumbing fault over a plumber.

The point was what you claimed for wasn't necessarily what happened because that's what you claimed for...

Anyway, hope you get a good result. Have you been given a total price for the work from either the insurer or your own people?

sparkychap - 2021-05-22 11:27:00

sparkychap wrote:

The point was what you claimed for wasn't necessarily what happened because that's what you claimed for...

Anyway, hope you get a good result. Have you been given a total price for the work from either the insurer or your own people?

I'm claiming for damage from a burst pipe because that's what's happened.

Thanks Sparky

No repair quote given by AMI, their builder the only one that's quoted so far.

Edited by houseofdad at 11:32 am, Sat 22 May

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 11:30:00

sparkychap wrote:

Or just tell them you'll go to Fair Go. We'd all watch.

Fair Go - yeah just bring out the big gun from the get-go.

houseofdad - 2021-05-22 11:35:00

Take the money and keep your head down. It appears AMI have accepted the claim so you must have Landlord insurance on a rental property,what they haven't seemed to pick up on is the fact that the property was vacant when the fault appeared and what my insurance company made clear to me was that if my rental property was vacant which it was at the time then I had to turn the water and electricity off at the main each time I left the property as it was a condition of the underwriter IAG, so take the money and run before they wake up to the fact the property was vacant.

hammer23 - 2021-05-22 23:01:00

Interesting cheers. For a mere $950 I will take the risk. $950 chump change.

houseofdad - 2021-05-24 13:30:00