The lower part of my house has been flooded after a torrential rain.
My insurance provider says my policy does not cover groundwater flooding. I had no idea about this. What can I do?
LL, York.
A reader’s insurance company is refusing to pay him after his house was flooded, claiming the policy does not cover groundwater flooding (file image)
Dean Dunham responds: Groundwater flooding occurs when heavy rainfall causes the water table to rise, resulting in storm sewers and drainage networks becoming overwhelmed.
Unfortunately, many home insurance providers do not cover groundwater flooding as part of their general home insurance policies, so your provider is likely right.
However, that doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t have any rights. In order for groundwater flooding not to be included in your policy, you’ll need to
It must be included in an exclusion clause. So the first step is to make sure that it is indeed excluded. If you are not sure, ask your provider to tell you where you can find the exclusion clause.
Assuming there is such an exclusion, the second consideration is whether this important information has been clearly explained to you. In this regard, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 states that key terms (such as an exclusion in a contract) must be highlighted.
This means that the merchant (in this case, the insurance provider) must take appropriate measures to ensure that its customers are aware of these facts.
This being the case, the next step is to consider whether your provider made the exclusion “prominent” or not, given that you were unaware of it.
I would recommend asking this key question to the provider and, when you receive an answer, you can make your own assessment of whether a reasonable consumer would have known that the policy excluded groundwater flooding.
If you decide the answer is “no,” file a formal complaint with the provider.
Explain that you consider the exclusion to be unenforceable because it was not highlighted, as it should have been under the Consumer Rights Act.
If your provider disagrees, as they almost certainly will, you can complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service, details of which can be found at financial-ombudsman.org.uk.
Where should I take my broken down rental vehicle?
I rented a car from a dealership, but declined it within the first month because I felt the steering rack was faulty, making it difficult to drive.
Now the dealer is asking me to take it for an inspection, but I want to take it to an independent workshop. Do I have the right to choose?
St Francis Church, Gillingham, Kent.
Dean Dunham responds: Where goods (including vehicles) prove defective within the first 30 days of the customer taking possession of them, the consumer has the right to reject the goods and demand a full refund.
This is the “short-term right of rejection” and is included in the Consumer Rights Act. This is the right you have invoked.
Normally, when you make a claim for faulty products within the first six months of a purchase, the retailer has the burden of proving you wrong – that is, proving that the problem was caused by you and not by a fault on the part of the manufacturer. This is called the “burden of proof”.
However, when a consumer exercises his short-term right of rejection, the burden of proof falls on him. Therefore, in this case, he must prove that the vehicle is faulty and that the fault was already present when he purchased it.
As usual, the garage where you bought the vehicle asks you to inspect the vehicle so that they can make their own assessment of whether there is any fault and, if so, what caused it.
This is a pretty standard and acceptable answer, but if I were you, I would be worried about leaving the car in the shop, as it could of course hide the faults.
It would therefore be wise to ask an external workshop to inspect the vehicle and give you a written opinion.
Since the burden of proof is on you, the law allows you to take this step. Make sure that the third-party garage only inspects the vehicle and does not interfere with it in any other way.