Upstairs refuse to claim on their insurance for damage?

All good advice there.
I'd only add four points.
1. Perhaps, in this more complex case, it would be worth setting out to your insurers, (including legal expenses insurers, if different) IN WRITING, because just about all insurers now have their very basically trained staff to take the initial calls / registration online - they are acting as a kind of triage system. So you really have to get past them to get the claim properly considered by the right people in the claims unit.
(I speak as someone who once was a wage slave manager at Direct Line, Churchill and other general insurance companies).
2. Worth getting your hands on the lease to see what that says, as there may be some freeholder liability, (though probably not).
3. In the longer term, perhaps look to have the boiler (or any new boiler) in your flat. Probably stating the bleeding obvious, but hey! Modern boilers seem to be getting smaller - and this will solve the potential problem in the longer term, albeit with a loss of some space in the flat.
4. An interesting case, so thanks for posting it. It is another one that justifies my aversion to leasehold flats and my preference for freehold houses. (Not saying I never buy flats, but I have a number of criteria which rules out buying over 80% of flats. I will have to add, "Do not buy a flat where the boiler is not within the flat itself" to my other rules, now!).
I'd be interested to hear how this ones progresses. Please keep us posted.
Regards
David Lawrenson
http://www.LettingFocus.com

Mmm, Darren has hit on a good point.

Worth actually seeing the damage, in detail. They could be trying it on. Does not mean you are admitting anything, just to see it. Others may disagree.

By the way, on the two occasions I have had cause to use them, I found claims assessors / adjusters to be very fair - and not at all out to "do over the claimant". In both cases, I was very glad to have them involved. In one case, they accepted most of a neighbouring flat's ludicrous claims for damage caused to their flat (which was actually minimal), whilst hugely scaling them back. In another, they approved a £4K claim which I really though was going to go down against me for "failing to maintain a chimney stack".

Final thought, at one of my talks I once had a very good insurance expert who said that for claims under £1,000 it was generally not worth claiming at all, due the excess and aggravation.
However, if a household had 2 or less claims totalling under £5K in 5 years, he said it probably would not make much difference to the premium.

Of course, we don't know what the excess is here.

Finally, naturally, any neighbour always expects the "rich landlord" to pay. Following the recent storms, I'm getting this quite a lot in relation to fence damage. It seems it is another thing to come with the territory of being a landlord i.e. "You must be rich, you should pay".
More on this here: https://www.lettingfocus.com/blogs/2019/04/who-is-responsible-for-fixing-my-fence-or-wall/

I quite enjoy bursting the neighbour's bubbles.

Keep us posted.

David Lawrenson
LettingFocus.com
Property Advice

Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 24/02/2020 - 15:21
Hello Ian and thank you for your helpful replies.
I do agree that the insurance arrangements pertaining to the flat as laid down within the leases (there are 2 of them) are far from satisfactory and have surprised my managing agents and others far more knowledgeable than myself with regard to these matters.
Unfortunately the leases are silent on the subject of who should insure the roof void and my insurance policy does not bear any specific mention to this either.
I appreciate that liability for the damage may be mine, but am encouraged by the comments from yourself and others that my property owner's liability should cover this and that the matter should be dealt with between the respective insurers without loss to myself.
I also note that most advice which I am receiving suggests that it would be unwise to offer any sort of remuneration to my neighbours as to do so could be construed as an admission of guilt and would probably invalidate my insurance policy.
I believe that I probably did not make it clear to my insurers at the time that I was claiming under the property owner's liability section of the policy but am at the same time disappointed that they could not have just advised me that this is what I should be doing.
I shall contact them again now explaining that I want to submit a claim under the property owner's liability section and hope that they will cooperate this time around.
With respect to legal advice this is an issue for me as I am based in Australia so am unable to easily obtain formal legal advice; (is there any possibility that I could at some stage be requested to attend court in the UK?)
As for maintenance of the boiler, as same has given me no problems since the purchase of the property I have always believed that maintenance would be reactive than proactive but I could of course be wrong as I do not really know what would be expected in this regard.
I thank you again for your assistance Ian.
Kind regards,
Paul

Reply to the comment left by Kate Mellor at 24/02/2020 - 14:48
Hello Kate and thanks for your comment.
Unfortunately, I do not have legal expenses cover on my policy.

Thanks,
Paul

Reply to the comment left by Seething Landlord at 24/02/2020 - 15:42
Thanks for your comments Seething Landlord. They are very helpful and I shall utilise your wording when I again contact my insurers.

Cheers,
Paul

Reply to the comment left by Darren Peters at 24/02/2020 - 16:06
Hi Darren and thanks for your comments.

Although there appears to have been some damage to the flat above (my agents obtained some pictures)there is indeed some confusion as to how exactly this may have occurred. The neighbour stated that there had been an earlier leak around March 2019 (which he had not mentioned until the leak happened in June 2019). He had asked his plumber to look up in the loft and the plumber had allegedly replaced a ball valve at his expense. When my agent's plumber went up in to the loft in June he said that there was a slow leak into the property above. I contacted my insurers immediately and after having received notification from them refusing to pay for damages to the upstairs flat advised same to the neighbours via my managing agents. From early July, I was in the process of arranging a trace and access quote for the loft space but the neighbour said (via my agents) that he was 'very busy' and could permit access until around September at which time one of the tank lids would also need to be replaced!!! I replied to my agents stating that I could not understand how this matter could not be urgent, whereon the neighbour confirmed that the leak had now mysteriously 'stopped'. When the agents' plumber was told of this he said that he had suspicions that the leak could have been caused by something the previous plumber had done since obviously leaks do not stop by themselves. The neighbour continued to assert, however, that although the damage to his property was minimal it was my responsibility and that if my insurers would not pay to rectify this damage than I would have to pay out of my own pocket. I requested that he respond to the following questions at which time I would give consideration to the his request :

1) He puts access dates for the repair to his property in writing to (AGENTS).
2) He advises in writing exactly what he expects me to cover the cost of.
3) He advises the reason for his plumber's last visit to the property.
4) He obtains a quote for the work to be done, I do the same via (AGENTS) and we'll go ahead with the cheapest quote

The neighbour did not respond to any of the above but did allow access for my contractor to fit a new lid.

After having been quiet for some considerable time, this month he again contacted my agents, this time threatening legal action, still not responding to any of the above questions(so I have no idea how much he is claiming) but now stating that his electrics had been damaged and that he was '90% certain' that this had also been caused by the mysterious self-fixing leak.
Something does not seem quite right here.....

Thanks,
Paul

Reply to the comment left by David Lawrenson at 24/02/2020 - 16:29
Thanks David for your helpful and informative comments.
I plan to contact my insurers a second time, this time making it clear that I am claiming under the property owner's liability section ie. not under the buildings insurance. I hope that this clarification will enable them to settle my neighbour's claim, whatever this might be. I have previously communicated with my insurers by e-mail and found them to be reasonably efficient in the speed of their replies.
I do have copies of both of my leases but there is no mention therein of any freeholder liability-this appears to have been clearly delegated to the lessee.
With respect to the boiler, this is actually based in my flat, but the tank which supplies it is based in the loft, ie. above my neighbour's property. I believe there is an alternative to having the tank but this would cost me a considerable amount to arrange and as the incumbent system has been largely 'trouble-free' for the last 30 years I have no great desire to go down this path.
I must say though that had I known back in 1990 what I know now I would never have purchased a flat which was not fully self-contained.
With respect to the actual damage to the upstairs flat I do not doubt that there is some but there are some questions as to how this may have occurred(see my reply to Darren Peters dated 26/02). My aim is basically to avoid the legal path if at all possible while not being taken for a ride. This is currently proving to be a delicate path to tread.
With respect to a potential increase in premiums after a claim I tend to agree with you. In the late 90's when I was living in the property I claimed on my insurers for damage caused by a leak from upstairs (different neighbours) and my premium increase was pretty insignificant. I am not sure why on this occasion the neighbour upstairs is being so difficult but I strongly suspect that the 'rich landlord' theory is weighing heavily on his mind, despite the fact that this is my only rental property.....
I shall let you know how this plays out and appreciate any more useful advice...

Thanks,
Paul

Happy to have been of help. Yes, keep us posted

if he hasn't answered your questions he isn't serious as his solicitor would need to ask the same ones

Thanks for your comment Puzzler- that would appear to be a distinct possibility. He wants me to 'pay up' and yet he refuses to answer any of the pertinent questions. I am hoping that I can get my insurers to deal with his claim under the property owner's liability section but if they refuse for any reason I have no intention of buckling under, particularly as if I paid for the damage to his property there would be nothing to stop him them claiming on his insurance as well. I am also still not exactly sure of my legal position with regard to this matter or whether I could potentially be requested to attend court in the UK -being based in Australia this concerns me……
Cheers,
Paul