Storm damage

What we look at

• Information about the weather

  We’ll need to be satisfied that there were storm conditions at the customer’s location at or around the time the damage happened. And we’re unlikely to be persuaded where a customer says the damage was caused by a storm ‘some time in the past’ or by general bad weather over time.

  But we might uphold the complaint if we see evidence that there were a number of storms over a period and we decide that the damage was caused by one of these.

  One way to measure wind speed, for example, is by using the Beaufort Scale, which uses a scale of 0 to 12. Some insurers say that only winds above a certain point on this scale are storm-force winds that could damage a building.
  
  When we assess complaints, we take into account the Beaufort Scale measurements, particularly if that’s how the insurer defined ‘storm’ in the policy. But that’s not the only factor we’ll think about. We’ll carefully consider all the evidence to decide whether there was a storm around the time the damage occurred.

  We’ll get local weather reports covering the period the storm is said to have occurred in so that we can assess the weather conditions at that time.

  The Met Office names storms, which serves as a good indication that the weather conditions at the time were indeed classed as a storm. But we’ll still check the weather records from the time, to find out:

  • if it was a storm
  • how intense the storm was
  • where the storm was in relation to the insured property

  Although weather stations could be a few miles from the customer’s property, they can provide useful evidence of weather conditions in the area at that time. The actual weather experienced by the customer could be a bit different from that recorded at the weather station.

  Sometimes we’ll look at reports from more than one weather station to understand what sort of conditions the customer’s property is likely to have experienced.
  
  So it’s about getting the fullest picture.

  If the customer doesn’t know when the damage happened, because they were away or the damage wasn’t noticeable straightaway, it’s reasonable to look further back in the records. 

  Snow, rain and hail storms

  We sometimes receive complaints about insurance claims for damage caused by snow, rain or hail. We consider a storm in the these circumstances to be when:

  • high volumes of snow, rain or hail falls over a relatively short period of time
  • the snow, rain or hail is extreme

  The impact of snow falling rarely leads to a problem. Damage to property is usually caused because of the weight of the snow once it’s settled, such as a collapsed roof.

  In these cases, we’ll look at whether the damage was consistent with a snowstorm or related to maintenance issues.

• The condition of the property

  We take into account the condition of the property at the time the storm damage is said to have occurred.
  
  There’s rarely evidence to show the exact condition prior to the storm. So we’re usually guided by what experts have said about the type of damage and its likely cause. Clear and detailed reports to explain the expert’s thinking – supported by photos of the damage – tend to be the most persuasive evidence.

  Insurers usually have a report from a surveyor and sometimes customers will have received their own report.

  We’ll consider all the evidence and think carefully about what the likely cause of damage was.

  In some cases we see it’s clear the property wasn’t in a perfect condition before the storm. But that won’t necessarily mean the damage was a result of wear and tear. We’ll weigh up the information we have to see whether the condition of the property or the storm was the primary cause of the damage.

  For example, we may be asked to investigate a complaint involving a claim for a flat roof said to have been damaged by a storm. We’re unlikely to uphold a complaint if we decide that: 

  • the flat roof was already in a poor state of repair at the time of the storm and this would (or should) have been clear to the customer
  • the storm merely highlighted this existing problem

  Many insurance policies contain exclusions for damage caused in certain ways, particularly when it was a result of:

  • wear and tear
  • gradual deterioration (sometimes called gradually operating causes)

  If you’ve rejected a claim for damage that occurred during a storm for these reasons, we’ll assess what the main cause of the damage actually was. We’ll bear in mind that the onus is on the insurer to show that an exclusion applies in order to rely on it to decline a claim.

  When we investigate complaints about retaining walls that have collapsed after stormy weather, we consider what the main cause could have been.
  
  Weep-holes and lime mortar allow moisture that builds up behind a wall to escape, easing pressure and reducing the chance of collapse. Most modern walls have weep-holes but many older walls don’t. We wouldn’t say a customer was at fault for not adding weep-holes to a wall that had originally been built without them.
  
  If we think that a wall has collapsed because of earth behind it becoming saturated over time, we wouldn’t see this as storm damage. But this type of damage might be covered by other parts of a buildings insurance policy.
  
  We may decide that the collapse was probably caused by a gradual build-up of pressure behind the wall, aggravated by:

  • weep-holes becoming blocked over time
  • an absence of any weep-holes
  • incorrect mortar repairs in older walls

• Replacement materials

  Sometimes insurers agree to a claim for storm damage, but the customer isn’t happy with the material used in the repairs. They might say the new materials don’t match the old ones. We’ll consider all of the evidence to create a fair outcome.

• Claiming under other cover

  We’ve investigated cases where we’ve found it was reasonable for the insurer to decline a claim for storm damage. 

  In these cases, the customer may still be able to claim for some or all of the damage under the accidental damage section of their policy, if there is one.
  
  We sometimes receive complaints about storm damage claims made under both contents and buildings insurance policies.

  We expect insurers to check whether any parts of the policy – not just the storm damage part – could provide cover for the damage. That includes any external or internal buildings damage, as well as any damage to contents.