insurance claim

[mr j fairfield]

hi i own a lease hold flat and had a leak from the flat upstairs into the bathroom of my own flat, its damaged a wall that needs re-tiling, the insurance has been called in but the tiles are discontinued (full retile is quoted for) and i dont want mis-matched tiles on the walls, the residents management company are refusing to ok the work, due to loss of no claims/increase in renewal etc they have offered to pay out of maintence just for damaged area with non matching tiles. i am share holder of this company but dont have my name on the policy, can i insist on insurance doing the work? The block policy is new for old /reinstatement etc.(lease says:THE LANDLORD SHALL INSURE THE PROPERTY AND KEEP IT INSURED IN THE JOINT NAMES OF ALL PERSONS HAVING ANY INTEREST AGAINST LOSS OR DAMAGE BY FIRE AND AIRCRAFT FULL REPLACEMENT VALUE /SHALL REBUILD AND REINSTATE THE SAME ACCORDANCE WITH BYLAWS?
it dosent say anything other than fire or aircraft?

[JK0]

If you soak the dislodged tiles in a bucket of water for a couple of days, you will be able to scrape off the glue and grout, and re-lay them.

Does that help at all?

[Interlaken]

You could insist on claiming for the work but your share of the insurance premium will go up as will everyone elses. At the next AGM raise this issue for discussion. In one of the blocks where I am a shareholder we have agreed where plumbing leaks cause this sort of damage the owner of the flat with the leak repairs the downstairs flat affected.

I would contact the owner of upstairs and put this to him/her.

Agree with James over tiles - put a good dose of Fairy liquid in the mix as this helps soften tile adhesive even more.

[jeffrey]

THE LANDLORD SHALL INSURE THE PROPERTY AND KEEP IT INSURED IN THE JOINT NAMES OF ALL PERSONS HAVING ANY INTEREST AGAINST LOSS OR DAMAGE BY FIRE AND AIRCRAFT FULL REPLACEMENT VALUE /SHALL REBUILD AND REINSTATE THE SAME ACCORDANCE WITH BYLAWS?

I think that this wording sounds defective. Sometimes property insurance might exclude liability for items dropped from aircraft; but surely it ought to include routine risks beyond fire- e.g. flood, storm, etc?