Question: If a building experiences water ingress, how can owners and committees differentiate between damage covered by their strata insurance (e.g., cyclone damage) and damage that might be existing or due to lack of maintenance?
Answer: If your building has existing problems like concrete spalling or timber rot, these are not ordinarily accepted as cyclone damage because it’s fairly obvious they are pre-existing.
Most committees, body corporate managers and building managers are reasonably aware of the existing maintenance issues and problems in the building, e.g., dark stains or the efflorescence you see coming out of balconies, concrete spalling, timber rot, steel corrosion. They’re all visible signs of water damage, but none occur within a week or two after the cyclone. They’re signs of long-term maintenance problems and would not typically be covered by insurance. However, they may very well impact how an insurer will respond to a claim. Long standing defect issues can result in a claim being denied in full, a partial response or the requirement of defects to be repaired before any resultant damage from an insurable event will be paid.
As a building consultant, when we attend the building for an assessment or project manage a site, we look for damage that happened during the cyclone. Also, our duty of care is to identify other things that could have contributed to damage, like water ingress.
Mould is always tricky. Mould can develop within days in Queensland, so it can be complicated to determine the difference between existing mould and new mould as a result of water inundation. Experts can determine that to help get a clear picture of what sits in that maintenance area and what may have contributed to further damage because it wasn’t repaired.
If your building has existing problems such as steel corrosion, rust, or timber rot, these are not ordinarily accepted as cyclone damage because it’s fairly obvious they are pre-existing.
This post appears in the April 2025 edition of The NSW Strata Magazine.
Bruce McKenzie
Sedgwick
E: bruce.mckenzie@au.sedgwick.com
Hi,
My strata is small, 13 people and run by a volunteer strata manager. In the past, standard excess, including excess for water damage, has always been set at $1000. The insurance company automatically increased the water damage excess to $10,000 and we were not notified, although the insurance policy was available in the AGM minutes. I have recently discovered and queried this, and was told that the strata manager “assumes this is because a few properties in the complex have had water damage claims due to poor roof maintenance”. He did not query this with the insurance company or investigate options for a cheaper excess.
Given that my property has not been the cause of this extremely high increase, I feel I would be left in an unfair position if I were to suffer water damage and be required to pay $10,000 in excess. What can I do though? Would I be required to pay this, or would it be considered an “unreasonable burden” as 1) the strata did not investigate cheaper excess options and 2) roof maintenance of others within the whole lot is the cause of high excess, so one owner being required to pay this would be unreasonable?
Please help and advise if there is anything sensible I can do to protect myself in case I did have a water damage incident.
Hi Casey
We feel your questions have been answered in the above post. If you have any more questions after reading the post, please get in touch.
Thanks
I am Secretary/Treasurer and trying to handle this problem-
Body Corporate was in process of replacing full roof. Tenant on top floor advised real estate that there was “small patch and cracks damage ” because roofing contractors were on the roof above. Full roof was finished and certified, roofing supervisor inspected damage in Unit – paint peeling in a corner and on ceiling which they advised were definitely not recent but pre-existing and some minor surface cracks around cornice – as such were not defective workmanship as a direct result/not covered under their warranty.
Body Corporate then arranged for Painter to quote based on those initial damages shown by tenant – this was submitted to Body Corporate insurance and approved. Painter completed the scope of works – by this stage it was 3 months after the initial report of damages. Painter finished and tenant signed off on the day. Nothing further was reported.
Another 2 months have passed since painting was completed and tenant took a couple of pictures and sent to real estate/Owner saying there is a few more minor cracks and paint peeling in a new spot in lounge/halfway down wall, and a small paint bubble on a different wall/near window in the same room as initial damage. (all of which were not identified by tenant previously nor part of the scope of works/insurance claim).
I contacted Painter and he said these new issues were not the damages shown to him as part of the scope of works he was engaged to do.
Owner is claiming that the new damages reported by tenant (4 months after full roof replacement and 2 months after painter completed works) are still Body Corporate issue and responsibility; as it must have been from the roof as it was old before it got replaced. (Owner has not inspected unit/damage personally nor has real estate for that matter, but just passing on photos and comments from tenant)
wondering who is now responsible to fix the new damage advised by tenant ? Given the time passed already – Can the new issues be claimed against insurance as part of the original damage claim? Is this Owner’s responsibility; or is it the Body Corporate’s responsibility? Can the Owner just continue to claim any future damage?
Hi,
I live in an apartment complex which is coming up to 25 years old. Some of the apartments are starting to suffer failures of flexible plumbing fixtures, leading to a large number of body corporate flood insurance claims. The insurance company is increasing premiums and excesses due to these leaks.
Can a Body Corp impose higher excesses on apartments which are ignoring advice to get flexible fittings inspected and where necessary repaired?
Could the insurance company eventually reject a claim where an apartment owner has not taken action to get flexible fittings inspected and repaired?
What is the best way to deal with apartment owners who do not take action to get flexible fittings inspected and repaired thus possibly jeopardizing the ability to get insurance and higher excesses.
We live in a hi-rise on the gold coast. There was a fire in the unit NEXT to ours. The building was evacuated, the fire brigade guys put out the fire that was apparently caused by a short circuit in the dishwasher. On returning to our unit after an hour, we find our unit half flooded with water caused by the sprinklers next door along with the huge amount of water from the fire hoses. We spent hours going into early morning, with the help of the firemen, channelling floor water down drains. We still, a week later, have large blower vacs blowing on walls to dry them out and alleviate any mould forming. My wife slipped while moving stuff, landed on her back and sprained her ankle. Has been incapacitated for a week. Our unit is fully tiled and has escaped any content damage. Can we make a claim from ‘somebody’ for all the trauma this has caused us?
As your question is detailed and relates to a specific situation, we are unable to provide advice. Responses can only be of a general nature. We suggest you seek independent advice from a qualified personal injury lawyer.
We would be happy to recommend someone to you.
Hi Tyrone,
I am one of the owners of a 3 unit tenacy (3 townhouses) Recently the owner of block 3 had some water damage to her floors caused by water running down the walls from the shower, upon closer inspection there was no water proofing membrane installed behind the tiles in her bathroom. She has made a claim with Strata insurance , my question to you is who pays the excess and who should pay for damages? I am off the understanding that you can only claim insurance if a bvuilding is less than 7 years. Our building is approaching 20 years old.
My other question also relates to waterproofing, the owners of unit 1 are getting cracked tiles throughout their floor, and we have had someone to come out to check it out and have stated that the tiler laid the tiles before the water proofing was dry. They want to rip up the entire floor and get it replaced through insurance. My question is, Is strata responsible to pay for, their entire new floors? Again it is an insurance issue i thought it would not be possible due to the building being 20 years old and outside the 7 year time frame.
Thank you
Hi Steven
Thank you for your comment.
We have responded to your question in the article above.
Tyrone Shandiman
tshandiman@iaa.net.au
1300 554 165
Strata Insurance Solutions
http://www.stratainsurancesolutions.com.au
This information is of a general nature only and neither represents nor is intended to be personal advice on any particular matter. Shandit Pty Ltd T/as Strata Insurance Solutions strongly suggests that no person should act specifically on the basis of the information in this document, but should obtain appropriate professional advice based on their own personal circumstances and the specific coverage afforded under their policy wording. Shandit Pty Ltd T/As Strata Insurance Solutions is a Corporate Authorised Representative (No. 404246) of Insurance Advisernet Australia AFSL No 240549, ABN 15 003 886 687
Hi Tyrone,
I live in high rise apartment build in year 2016 in Sydney. Back in Jan-2020, hot water value, which is located outside the unit in common area, burst and water flooded 2 units including mine. Strata manager arrange revivalist to remove the damaged/water soaked floorboard and dry the floor. Post that Strata manager lodged claim with Strata Building Insurance to replace the floorboard in both the units. But the claim was rejected by Insurance company stating that the insurance does not cover floating floorboard as per condition of the policy.
Post this Strata Manger left the issue with me to follow up with strata building insurance company to reassess my claim. Which I did with Insurance company but was unsuccessful in getting favourable outcome. Please note I don’t have Content insurance so now I have to shell out money from my pocket to replace the floorboard.
My question is – can I claim my floorboard replacement cost from Strata body corporate since they took out incorrect Building insurance policy which did not covered floating floorboard ? There are ~100 Units and all have floating floorboard.
What are option I have ?
Thank you
Hi Sushil
We have responded to your question in the above article.
Hi Tyrone
I’m a lot owner in Victoria and 4 weeks back had a common copper pipe burst in my bathroom floor slab servicing my fixtures. It’s a 1960s double brick build. I only purchased the property 4 years ago.
The leak due to the extent of water was hard to trace and the external bricks were first removed to the outside boundary wall, including an isolation valve installed so other lots could receive cold water. The plumber who chased and fixed the leak said it was the original pipe that had been placed during construction of the build. My pedestal basin had to be removed from the wall and they had to jack hammer the wall and floor of my bathroom.
Question: What is the building insurance claim process and what is the role of OC vs OCC? Who gets involved where? I feel like I’m going around in circles with no clear understanding of protocol, nor having an advocate in my corner as a lot owner in getting my bathroom fixed.
I’ve managed to get our OC to lodge a claim this week and the Broker has requested that I needed to get a quote to repair my bathroom yet I’ve not had any damaged assessed including potential water damage, nor do I have any scope of works to request a quote to repair my bathroom.
Instead, time has been spent in understanding who’s financially responsible for the burst pipe. Under the Act it states that if a common pipe services more than one lot, it’s an Owners Corporation responsibility. After an email received from the plumber saying the pipe serviced my fixtures, the OC was quick to send me an email saying it’s my responsibility and to send all invoices directly to my lot to pay which was over $2,000 without the reinstatement to the brick and my bathroom repairs. Surely if this is a building insurance claim, the OC would pay the invoices and have them reimbursed at once the claim had been finalised?
I want the repair work to be certified to building code to protect my asset. In my view they need to gut my bathroom, waterproof and retile. It’s just not a patch job to where the jack hammering needs a handy man to do a patch job. Who can I turn to for advice so I know where I stand? I feel like I’m on a merry-go-round working with a really incompetent OC, including their Broker. This shouldn’t be this difficult.
Greatly appreciate any sound advice that you can provide me.
Many thanks Kylie
We recently bought brand new apartment and there was a leakage from the roof due to improper waterproofing work as well as leakage from flashed walls around the terrace roof. Since it is only 1 and 1/2 year old and building construction is within warranty ( 6 years for the building and 7 year for water proofing of roof), builder is repairing the leakage. However it has damaged our Roman Blinds by stained water coming from roof. Who is responsible to compensate for damage of Roman Blinds.
Hi Kishor
We have responded to your question in the article above. You can jump straight to the Q&A here.
Hi Tyrone,
I am a tenant (block of 8) apartment in NSW with 4 units on lower level and 4 on first floor. This incident occurred on 4th March 20. The roof was being upgraded and replaced as commissioned by Strata. Scaffolding had been erected and work has been completed to remove the insulation and waste and debris from the roof cavity that has occurred over time.
By clearing this material from the roof cavity it has exposed my unit to water ingress. The insulation has previously acted as a buffer and absorbed water ingress that has resulted in mould build up in the roof above my unit. The agent was aware of this mould but no action taken over 18 months as Owners Corporation funded this current works that would rectify the issue.
As a direct consequence of the works commissioned by Strata and overseen by a project manager and roofing company water ingress has occurred.
No tarps or protection was provided to cover the roof that had known defects and leaks as council certification was required before works could be further completed (historical building).
I went to work at 3.30am and returned home from work that afternoon and found significant damage to the property with water damage to floors roof and appliances in the kitchen (stove top) and also to my personal effects. The 3 other upstairs units were damaged as well but are occupied by owners.
It was foreseeable to a qualified building professional that given the weather forecast for the week and the delay in repairs / replacement of the roof that it would be exposed to the elements. No preventable measures were taken to offset this risk. No tarps were placed over the roof until the Saturday.
I don’t have contents insurance and given the excess it would not be economical to proceed with a claim anyway on that type of policy. My agent and strata both advised they are not liable or willing to help.
Last week I received a call from an insurance assessor to visit the property to inspect damage to the property itself as requested by Strata. A builder then visited and noted the damage caused and said they were authorised to submit a costing to the insurer for repairs to be completed. I then followed this up with Strata as I believe that if the insurer recognised the claim against property then they should acknowledge the damage to my personal effects. Strata have now advised they have sent my details and information to the insurer.
Am I going in the right direction with this claim? Or do I approach Fair Trading?
Thanks
Hi Wayne
If you believe there fault on behalf of the owners corporation or another party such as the owner of your lot, the starting point is submitting a letter of demand outlining your case. The letter must include:
1. Date of incident;
2. Description of the incident;
3. What was damaged;
4. Why you believe that party is responsible/negligent;
5. What you are seeking in compensation & justification (such as invoices/quotes for replacement of personal effects)
6. Bank details,.
The strata or owner should refer the matter to their insurer who will assess whether your claim has grounds and if so, they consider a claim under the public liability portion of the claim. If you are not satisfied with the response, you can lodge a dispute with Fair Trading or a State Civil & Administrative Tribunal.
Kind Regards
Tyrone Shandiman
Strata Insurance Solutions
http://www.stratainsurancesolutions.com.au
07 3899 5129
tshandiman@iaa.net.au
thanks Tyrone.
I appreciate the response
Wayne
Dear sir/ madam
I live in NSW . My master bedroom and walkway was flooded during that big storm on 09/02/2020 damaging all the furniture’s in the master bed room, including bed mattress, bedside table, tall boy as well as the carpet. My unit was flooded due to the water coming from unit 1 inside wall.
The wall that is adjacent to my master bed Room. Unit 1 was also badly flooded. Their unit was like a little swimming pool .It seems that their own balcony was flooded first resulting that water coming to their 3 bed room unit after that, that water enter in my unit 2.
I then asked the body corporate and builder what was the cause of flood in both of units .The answer from builder was that unit 1 owner put little water strainer in the balcony drain which blocked the drain and caused flood.
Then strata said flood happened due to the leaves which blocked the balcony drain . After that incident the builder did some repairments in unit 1 balcony. I did then ask strata and builder. Are there any issues with water drain system in the building but they denied?
When I asked the strata, who is responsible for the damaged furniture’s and carpet in my unit 2 the strata advised me to claim from my own home insurance. Strata insurance policy does not cover those items in my unit 2.
But for unit 1 there are changing their vinyl floor from strata insurance stating that those items are covered.
What is the role of strata in this matter for the damages that occur in my unit 2? Due to the water coming from unit 1.
My question is who should be responsible for the damages that happen in my unit 2 . Is that my own insurance, strata insurance, builder or unit 1 owner.
Thanking you. waiting for your reply. should I go for legal action ?
Hi
Furniture and carpet are not covered by a strata policy as they do not fall in the definition of “building” for insurance purposes. The vinyl flooring may be covered if it is permanent flooring or if there is an extension on the policy for floating floors which is an option that can be taken out.
If you have contents/landlords insurance my suggestion would be to lodge a claim on your contents insurance and let your contents insurer pursue a recovery if they believe grounds exist.
If you do not have contents/landlords insurance then you may wish to draft a “Letter of Demand” to the owners corporation. The letter needs to state the date and a description of the incident, why you believe the owners corporation are negligent and costs you are seeking with justification (such as invoices or quotes).
Please note however, insurers commonly seek to deny legal liability claims where the event was an unforeseen event which is why we recommend lodging a contents/landlords insurance claim.
Kind Regards
Tyrone Shandiman
Strata Insurance Solutions
http://www.stratainsurancesolutions.com.au
07 3899 5129
tshandiman@iaa.net.au
thank you for the reply . I just want to know what will be the role of strata when those incident happen ? I was told by strata that the main contributing factor to water ingress into the units was leaves blocking the drains which found there was in their from this/ previous storm events . That means water drain was not maintained properly so Strata should be responsible for the damage . The building where i am leaving now is one year old.waiting for reply .
Thank you for your comment. I am limited to advising you on how an insurance policy might work. The question you have asked appears to be a question of legal responsibility which is only ever decided by solicitors and judges. If you believe the strata should be responsible you should contact the strata manager with your concerns and allow the committee to review – alternatively you can seek legal advice.
Kind Regards
Tyrone Shandiman
Strata Insurance Solutions
http://www.stratainsurancesolutions.com.au
07 3899 5129
tshandiman@iaa.net.au
Thank you for your suggestion . Can I seek fair trading suggestion on this matter .
Thank you
Hi – You can seek advice from fair trading.
Hi a garden bed in common area damaged walls damage if 7,000 body corporate has excess of 5,000 they are telling me to pay for all damage then fight body corporate for the 5,000 excess. Why do i pay for damages caused from a comon area?
Hi Margaret
This sounds like something you need to take up with the body corporate and it will depend on which state and legislation you fall under. For example in QLD properties that are a “Standard Module” – section 184 Body Corporate and Community Management (Standard Module) Regulation 2008 applies.
The two things that need to be considered are:
1. Is it reasonable in the circumstances for you as the owner to pay the excess given the damage was caused by a common area leak?
2. Does the event affect your lot only or your lot & common property?
Applicable legislation for section 184 Body Corporate and Community Management (Standard Module) Regulation 2008:
(3) For an event affecting only 1 lot, the owner of the lot is liable to pay the excess unless the body corporate decides it is unreasonable in all the circumstances for the owner to bear the liability.
Example— If a shower screen is damaged in a lot and an insurance claim is made under the body corporate’s reinstatement insurance, the owner of the lot would be liable under subsection (3) to pay the excess unless the body corporate decides it is unreasonable for the owner to be required to pay it. However, if there is a fire within a lot caused by a short circuit in electrical wiring located in an internal partition, the body corporate might decide it would be unreasonable for the owner to be required to pay the excess.
(4) For an event affecting 2 or more lots, or 1 or more lots and common property, the body corporate is liable to pay the excess unless the body corporate decides it is reasonable in all the circumstances for the excess to be paid for by the owner of a particular lot, or to be shared between owners of particular
lots, or between the owner of a lot and the body corporate, or between owners of particular lots and the body corporate.
Tyrone Shandiman
Strata Insurance Solutions
http://www.stratainsurancesolutions.com.au
07 3899 5129
tshandiman@iaa.net.au
Hi that didn’t really answer my question . The damage to my lot happened because the body corporate did not properly maintain the common property in 14yrs i have lived here and that this trust by body corporate term was breach. It would be reasonable for body corporate to pay the excess .I am in qld. Conversely the body corporate is responsible for paying the excess if the claim relates to common property,this includes insurance events where an item of common property has failed (Garden Bed )and caused damage to fixtures and fittings in a lot.
HI Margaret
Thank you for your reply – I think you have answered your own question in the reply. My suggestion is to continue taking it up with the body corporate. happy to discuss further with you – feel free to call me.
Tyrone Shandiman
Strata Insurance Solutions
http://www.stratainsurancesolutions.com.au
07 3899 5129
tshandiman@iaa.net.au