Mum and soldier shows importance of perseverance in insurance battle over leaky roof

Renee invested in a home for her young family, only to have everything that could go wrong, go wrong.

Renee Shaw got a bit of a shock when she was told that the house she had bought for herself and her three children needed a new roof.

Her insurance company, Tower, then said because it was leaking, she would not be covered for any further damage until the roof was replaced.

Ms Shaw hired roofer Gene Richardson, of West Coast Roofing, to do the job for around $13,000.

On the day of the job, Renee was worried about the weather – dark clouds on the horizon – Mr Gene Richardson seemed confident, and he and his team went ahead and took most of the roof off – and then the storm arrived.

Torrential rain poured into Ms Shaw’s open house, and she got an urgent call from the roofer saying get home urgently, and that he had no tarps, no plastics on site to cover the roof.

The result was a house flooded with water, and Ms Shaw said the cost to fix the damage was over $40,000.

But her own insurance company, Tower, said they wouldn’t cover her because she needed to have told them exactly when she was going to get the roofing work done, and organise for extra cover to be in place.

Then the roofer’s insurance, QBE, said they only assessed the damages at about $14,000, and they held Ms Shaw 50 per cent liable because she had supplied the roofing timber, and on the day the timber was late.

QBE’s eventual pay out of around $6000 was made directly to their client, West Coast Roofing, and we understand Mr Richardson took the claim money as payment for finishing the roof.

QBE told Fair Go that their contract was with West Coast Roofing, not Ms Shaw, that they had reached a settlement with their client, and that they were satisfied with their assessment of the claim.

Tower say Ms Shaw’s insurance policy did not cover any damage done during renovation. They say home owners must ensure trades people working on their homes have the appropriate insurance.

Which all seems very unfair since it was Ms Shaw who has suffered the damage, but has not seen a cent of the insurance money.

Ms Shaw is getting her house repaired as and when she can afford it, and cannot move back in with her family until it is all fixed.

SHARE ME

More Stories