Aami - Mia

[Yaw]

Originally Posted by Ratmac

Does anyone read there insurance policy any more ?
Would you buy a microwave and then complain because it's not a television ?
Insurance will not cover earth movement. Even if you don't read the whole policy, at least read the defined events that your policy covers you for, that will give you an idea of what you CAN claim.
It sucks what happened but it happens quite a lot (im in the industry but don't work for AAMI) and will never be covered as its not a defined events and most policies will specifically exclude earth movement of any kind except for earthquake for some companies.

The correct procedure from here is to not rant and rave, but to go through there internal dispute resolution procedure and if they still uphold the denial then go to the financial ombudsman service.
I don't like your chances but the most efficient way is to follow procedure, ringing up and yelling at the consultant or manager is not going to change the info they have been provided by an Engineer.
At the end of the day its not personal its just what the policy said, and from what I have heard they have made the right decision according to the policy wording which you choose.

Good luck with getting your house rectified though.

I too work in the industry and am 100% with Ratmac on this one.
Trev, like has been already pointed out by the guy that used to work for AAMI, thier policy is a defined event policy which covers the events defined in the policy. With that in mind, what defined event has happened to you?
If you cannot find one of the defined events your policy covers then you are not covered.

[LTDHO]

Anyway they have lost all my business when the policies are due for renewal and I would warn everyone else about using AAMI and any company that falls under Suncorp (AAMI’s parent company), read your policies well.

So what you are saying is:
Don't read your policy, then when you try an lodge a claim that is not covered you can 'name and shame' them on a motoring forum.

How about you admit you made a mistake and your insurer actually honoured your policy as they should.

[XDV800]

Originally Posted by irish2

A meter is not a good guide. The rule is; the base of the trench must not be within a 45 deg plane of the base of the footing of any structure.

Yep thats right. I wasn't sure how to put it correctly.
Being an earthmoving operator i have noticed that plumbing and such is conducted a general distance away from footings as space allows.
However the amount of dodgy stuff ive seen, like massive holes to get to a sewer connect right next to a new structure, poorly backfilled and subsiding within days or weeks is mind boggling.
But a neighbouring properties plumbing directly attributing to the ground movement of the affected property, that has been caused by negligence on behalf of firstly building management, and then compounded by service installer. The industry is rife with negligence.
I wouldn't invest in building any structure these days, i'll invest in long established stuff in the future

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

So what you are saying is:
Don't read your policy, then when you try an lodge a claim that is not covered you can 'name and shame' them on a motoring forum.

How about you admit you made a mistake and your insurer actually honoured your policy as they should.

I really don't know whay I am bothering to answer you because my opinion of you isn't very high, but anyway. . . . . . .

I dispute their interpretation of the wording, I think they are being pedantic currently because finacially they are under the pump.

Also, I know for a fact that they have paid a claim under the exact same citcumstances as mine for a person I know who lives in the same town as I live in, BUT it was 2 years ago, well before all the natural disaters that are going on.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by yzfr101

Insurers don't insure shoddy workmanship. The contracted installers of the service will likely be responsible for rectifying this.
Was the dig conducted within a metre of your foundation?

Yes, it was right along side the footing, they would have felt/seen the footing when they dug the trench.

Going down the path of getting re-course from the original owners/builders/contractors is going to be far too difficult, it was 15 years ago they did it.

[irish2]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Yes, it was right along side the footing, they would have felt/seen the footing when they dug the trench.

Going down the path of getting re-course from the original owners/builders/contractors is going to be far too difficult, it was 15 years ago they did it.

Work that causes structural damage must be warranted for 25 years. It is the only way to go.

[xisled]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

I really don't know whay I am bothering to answer you because my opinion of you isn't very high, but anyway. . . . . . .

I dispute their interpretation of the wording, I think they are being pedantic currently because finacially they are under the pump.

Also, I know for a fact that they have paid a claim under the exact same citcumstances as mine for a person I know who lives in the same town as I live in, BUT it was 2 years ago, well before all the natural disaters that are going on.

Your wrong about one thing, they are not under the pump financially. Natural disaters happen every year.

The money that AAMI has comes from suncorp, and any event that has happened such as flooding, bush fires etc, they have reinsurance for. So any company that comes under the suncorp group which is about half the insurance industry, all the costs of the big event gets added up together, and once the cost hits a certain level the reinsurance will cover will kick in. Also insurance company's plan for disasters and out certain amounts of money away for big events.


Now for the wording of AAMI's policy.

You are not covered under any section of
the policy for damage, loss, cost or liability caused
by or arising from or involving:
- erosion or washing away of soil, earth or gravel,
- soil movement or settlement,

(this can be found on page 14 of the PDS)

Even in your own topic you said this.
After the plaster fell we got an engineer in to work out what was going on, he investigated the problem and found that when our next door neighbour built their house with A V Jennings about 12 months after ours the plumbers dug a 700 mm deep trench along side our garage footings to put in a gas main. Over time the disturbed ground has dried at a different rate to the ground around it and subsequently this has under-mined our garage footings. A written engineers report supported this.

You yourself even said it was due to settlement, how has AAMI interperated the wording any different, it is very basic wording.

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

I really don't know whay I am bothering to answer you because my opinion of you isn't very high, but anyway. . . . . . .

WTF? Please PM me as to why this is the case.

Originally Posted by Big Trev

I dispute their interpretation of the wording, I think they are being pedantic currently because finacially they are under the pump.

It is always interpretation, should a section of the wording be unclear or 'grey' then it can be disputed, at some times succussfuly.

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Also, I know for a fact that they have paid a claim under the exact same citcumstances as mine for a person I know who lives in the same town as I live in, BUT it was 2 years ago, well before all the natural disaters that are going on.

With this information, and unless the wording has been adjusted in the last two years, this gives you reason to have the matter reviewed. You will need to obtain specific details though.

Awaits PM

[snypereb]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

So what you are saying is:
Don't read your policy, then when you try an lodge a claim that is not covered you can 'name and shame' them on a motoring forum.

How about you admit you made a mistake and your insurer actually honoured your policy as they should.

Lol spot on!
Looks like you hit a sore spot too. Lol

[Professor Farnsworth]

OP requested lock