The homeowner noticed cracking in a load-bearing wall on July 8, 2022, and quickly linked the issue to a leaking water main he discovered the next day. He attributed the cracking and additional damage throughout his house to ground movement from the leak.
Independent assessments commissioned by Hollard Insurance presented contrasting views. A plumber observed substantial leakage, resulting in damp conditions and soaking of nearby stumps. He suspected this might have led to slight settlement problems and further cracking within the property, particularly in the kitchen area.
Hollard's engineer, however, inspected the house roughly a month later. Their report downplayed the leaking pipe, chalking up the damage to long-term issues associated with the soil's properties, including seasonal moisture changes and environmental causes. According to the engineer, the cracking damage predated the observed leak and was related to the house's history.
The homeowner highlighted extensive renovation work conducted between 2016 and 2019 to stabilize the foundations of his 1930s-era home, including underpinning and relevelling. He noted the lack of substantial cracking until the sudden appearance of damage in July 2022.
AFCA’s evaluation supported the homeowner’s evidence that the damage in the newer parts of the house was a recent development. Video footage and the plumber's testimony showed significant leakage, undermining the engineer's less critical assessment. AFCA also questioned the conclusiveness of the engineer's floor-level survey.
"While there is a history of movement-related damage, the noted cracking around the extension did not follow this pattern," AFCA determined. According to the authority, the factors cited by the engineer involved gradual, long-term damage, but in this case, the damage seemingly appeared suddenly due to the leaking pipe.
In its final ruling, AFCA concluded that the homeowner's losses likely resulted from an unexpected, sudden release of water. Consequently, Hollard Insurance would be responsible for repairing the assessed damage or covering repair costs. However, unrelated damage not connected to the leak would be excluded from coverage.
The case underscores the importance of independent reviews and cultivates awareness about homeowners' rights amidst damage disputes. AFCA's decision shines a light on their role in ensuring fair evaluations are considered in claim disputes.
This ruling is reported with original insights from an article appearing in Insurance News.
