December 2011 The Financial Ombudsman has confirmed that they do not consider the recorded wind speed, as measured on the Beaufort scale, to be the deciding factor. 

Claim Experts are already using this decision on similar disputes.

A policyholder questioned an insurer’s view that wind speed was not strong enough to have caused storm damage.

Mrs I was disappointed when her buildings insurer refused to pay her claim for storm damage to the stone cladding on the front of her house. The insurer said there had been no reports of storm conditions in her town at the time she said the damage had occurred. It told her it could only consider claims for storm damage if wind speeds reached level 10 on the Beaufort scale (in other words, between 55 and 63 mph). The recorded wind speeds for the period in question had not been as strong as this.

Mrs I thought this was unfair. She said the fact that the wind had been strong enough to cause the damage ‘regardless of its exact speed’ indicated that her claim should be covered under the policy. She said that if the insurer insisted that the claim was not covered under the ‘storm damage’ section of the policy, then the claim should be paid under the ‘accidental damage’ section.

The insurer remained adamant that it would not pay her claim. It told her its investigations had shown that the damage had been caused by ‘gradual deterioration and wear and tear’, which was not covered under any section of her policy.

However, the ombudsman told the insurer that they do not consider the recorded wind speed, as measured on the Beaufort scale, to be the deciding factor in cases involving storm damage. This has long been their approach in such cases, and they take the general view that damage can occur even where the wind speed is lower than level 10 on the Beaufort scale.

Sometimes, for example, there can be extremely strong localised gusts in areas that are some way from the weather station, or where the particular layout of buildings has created unusual wind conditions. In this case, there had been reports of significant wind and rain in the area covered by Mrs I’s postcode on the day she said the damage had occurred.

The insurer had told Mrs I that because of exclusions relating to ‘wear and tear’ and ‘gradual deterioration’, it was unable to consider her claim under any section of the policy. However, these exclusions applied only to claims for accidental damage, not to the other sections of the policy.

The ombudsman upheld the complaint and told the insurer to deal with the claim under the section of the policy that covered storm damage.

For more advice on you storm insurance claim, call Claim Experts on 0845 437 8654