Churchill's refusal to pay out floored us

Around midnight one Friday last October my downstairs neighbour reported water pouring through his ceiling. Speed was of the essence and, since our block of flats has a highly competent group of select workmen, we called our regular plumber. He arrived within 10 minutes and stayed until 4am sorting out the problem. There was a leak coming from beneath our tiled kitchen floor. The only solution was to crack a square metre hole in the tiles and saw through the floorboards. First thing on Saturday we called our insurer, Churchill, to report the event. The call centre said we had to wait until Monday. We phoned on Monday but Churchill refused to send an assessor, saying we were not covered because our floor had not been damaged by water. It also refused to pay the plumber's bill of £277 since he was not of their selection. We pay £1,500 a year for this policy, including legal expenses insurance, but when we attempted to recruit legal services we were told there was a conflict of interest. In the meantime, we still have a large and dangerous hole in our kitchen floor which we cannot afford to repair ourselves. RL, Edinburgh On second thoughts, Churchill agreed to pay for the plumber as a goodwill gesture, although it says it didn't have to. The company should not have hesitated for a moment as it could not possibly expect you to leave water pouring through a ceiling from Friday night until it appointed a plumber on Monday morning. But Churchill absolutely refuses to pay for the repairs to your kitchen floor. This is because the policy says it will pay only for anything that has been damaged by the escape of water. It argues that your floor was damaged by the plumber who should have found the leak by climbing up through your neighbour's ceiling. Churchill says your policy excludes "trace and access" of pipe problems, and a policy that would pay in these circumstances will be more expensive. This decision has been confirmed at chief executive level. That is ridiculous. However carefully anyone read the small print, no reasonable person would believe that a claim could be turned down because a plumber took the fastest direct route to stop a leak in the early hours of the morning. Churchill now says you can use the legal advice insurance you paid for but you have followed my suggestion to complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service. This will take at least three months to resolve but do please let me know the outcome. • Email Margaret Dibben at [email protected] or write to Margaret Dibben, Your Problems, The Observer, Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU and include a telephone number. Do not enclose SAEs or original documents. Letters are selected for publication and we cannot give personal replies. The newspaper accepts no legal responsibility for advice.