Plumbing defects and insurance claims under ministerial order
Plumbing Defects & Insurance claims…
To all the lawyers, building experts and insurance colleagues…
Maybe not as commonly discussed as DBI claims
BUT
Equally important is the Licensed Plumbers General Insurance Order 2002!
Yes! I appreciate some will remind me - it is for the plumber to claim on this insurance, but it is relevant to understand what plumbers are covered for.
We often see these type of claims for defects and subsequent insurance claims emanate from initially a domestic building claim (section 8 warranties) or even Water Act claims in Victoria.
AND Here’s why - this cover is SO relevant:
There are so many water leaks and plumbing issues in houses and strata;
property insurance often has a defect exclusion;
AND…we see so little material about how plumbing claims are made
Well, here is a snapshot:
Firstly,
Secondly:
Thirdly, that insurance is NOT last resort in Victoria. What I mean is that unlike DBI a plumber does NOT need to be dead, disappeared or insolvent to claim.
Fourth! - just like DBI, there is a Ministerial Order that governs the scope of cover and limits of cover.
Here are some key bits YOU should know:
*Great you say…UNLESS you are the plumber of course…
*but there is $50,000 for a claim (s) under a compliance certificate.
You may think $50k really is not a lot if there are substantial defects.
However:
AND
REASONABLE legal costs are covered too…
There are loads of other limits or requirements of cover and it comes down to what policy is there and whether a claim is made!
AND whether you can prove defects - so expert evidence is always critical.
Contact us if you have any questions
Licensed Plumbers General Insurance Order 2002 (PDF)
This article is a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
The amount of plumbing related building defects I see in Victoria is astonishingly high. Often they exceed all other defects. Yet the insurance that should respond has become a farce.
More and more I am seeing protection works disputes become disputes about access to land, adverse possession, boundary issues, building defects and property damage.
The headline change is that many of the Code's obligations are proposed to become legally enforceable. On paper that is a significant shift.
Burns v Corbett and later decisions mean tribunals are not Chapter III courts and cannot exercise federal jurisdiction. It is time to consider a national tribunal.