Incompotenet Claims Investigation and Settlement

Hi, Around 2 months ago I lodged a claim for damages caused to my bedroom carpet/wall as a result of water damages. The Consultant contacted me and leak detector specialist was sent in as I did not know the cause of the water Leak. The first leak detector was convinced the leak was as a result of maintenance to my Shower cubicle. He conducted a Green Dye Test and which to my understanding if the fault was as he suggested i.e. water seeping via my shower floor into the bedroom, then I would have seen green dye stained water seep through in the bedroom. We waited an hour and this did not happen BUT; it was still assessed as a faulty shower floor.

I wrote to my Claims Administrator Contesting this as Below:

With regards to my dispute, as explained to your colleague earlier, when the Leak Detection Specialist came to my home, he conducted two tests. This was to find the source of the water which was leaking into the adjacent bedroom. The first of the tests was to fill my shower cubicle to the brim with dye stained water including the toilet pan. The dye used in the shower cubicle was a dark green dye which was clearly visible. To my understanding this test was conducted in order to ascertain if the leak did in fact emanate from the shower cubicle and if positive, the water seeping through into the bedroom would be dark green. The Leak Detection specialist and I waited an hour for the dye stained water to seep through which never happened, however clear water was detected in the bedroom. He confirmed that the clear water was not there when he started his tests. He eventually said that the dye stained water is probably building up and will appear a day or so later. This I think is a bit ludicrous as its just a brick wall separating the 2 rooms and if so, how do you explain the clear water building up as per his tests and not the dye stained water. I then asked him to include this in his report which he did but his findings weren't conclusive in line with his tests i.e. if you conducted a dye test and failed, how did you draw the conclusion that the shower cubicle was the fault? After an hour of waiting for the dye stained water to appear, the Leak detection specialist decided on conducting a gas test, I think it was Nitrous Oxide or something of the sort. I'm not too sure on the science of this but he passed gas through my shower head and used some sort of device to detect if gas was leaking from within the walls. He assured me that it wasn't as the machine did not beep. With this in mind, how was the conclusion that the water seep was caused by a hole in my shower cubicle when the shower cubicle dye test failed? If you could please look into this and share your thoughts I'd greatly appreciate.

The Claims Admin then sent out a second Leak Detector or Assessed the Fault and Submitted his Report (Please see Leak Assessment Report 2). This Report contradicted and dismissed the first report as nonsense because if it was the faulty Shower Floor, then How was there no Dye seeping into the bedroom at the time of testing?

I then contracted a Private Plumber who pointed out to me the Damp in my ceiling for where the geyser is placed and the possibility that water was in fact leaking on the ceiling boards and seeping down the walls. I contacted outsurance with this new info and it would seem that outsurance was all to keen to close my first claim for damages because it wasn't leaking pipes. I was furious as I did not draw the conclusion of a leak anywhere, this was what the leak detectors set out to prove (or disprove) My claim was for damages to my Property and not playing round of cause and effect with them. I insisted they keep my claim open as I am not interested in their Claim Closing policy in order to open another claim just for me to go through another cycle of assessments. Its now over 2 months and Ive no resolution in the matter!

Please see Leak Detection Report 1: Leak Report 1: On site we met the client who indicated that his bedroom carpet is getting wet and suspects there to be a burst pipe in the adjacent bathroom. We conducted audio testing on the visible riser points and noted no audio. We conducted a tracer gas test on the property and noted no signs of gas surfacing on the property. We conducted a pressure test on the property and noted no drop on the gauge. We conducted a green dye test on the shower base and noted green dye to be surfacing on the bathroom floor We conducted a green dye test on the shower base and noted green dye to be surfacing on the bathroom and clear water to be pushing through the adjacent wall. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the shower enclosure be stripped, waterproofed and retiled to prevent further ingress of water when shower is in use.

Leak Assessment Report2

To whom it may concern, On the 22/07/2020 Zipp Plumbers went to [Address] to carry out a leak detection as requested by Outsurance. When arriving on site they plumbers carried out an inspection of all taps and toilets and confirmed nothing to be leaking. We then carried out a pressure test and confirmed no water pipes to be leaking and the water meter was still at the time of testing. When inspecting the waste pipes where the water has collected they noted that the basin waste is causing the damages. To rectify this problem a 45’ pvc bend needs to be installed on the waste pipe for the basin and the shower as currently it is discharging onto the concrete and causing dampness on the wall which is damaging the carpets in the bedroom.