Mario Angiolini
For and on behalf of Tarquin Management Ltd
Dear Mario,
Further to
the results from the leak detection please can you provide
an update in respect of getting the external repairs
completed.
Kind
Regards
James
James
Pitchell | McLarens
Executive
Manager – South West Commercial Property
McLarens
5th floor
Broad Quay House
Broad Quay
Bristol
BS1 4DJ
Office:
0117 457 9573
Mobile:
+44 (0)7503 014123 |
PRIVACY
STATEMENT: We
are required to capture and process personal information
supplied to us in the fulfilment of our services. Our
obligations vary depending on the jurisdiction involved.
For further details as to how this information is used,
kept secure and your rights, please see the relevant
Privacy Statement on our website – https://www.mclarens.com/privacy-policy/
From: James Pitchell
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2025 1:25 PM
To: 51dp@davylondon.net
Cc: Dominic Galvin <dgalvin@c-sr.com>
Subject: RE: Insurance Claim for Water Damage 51
Bray Place - Our Ref MUK.234380
Dear Mario,
Please see
attached the email sent on 27 August 2025 with a copy of the
Polygon. The report confirms that the cause of ingress. The
required works will fall outside of the insurance claim.
Kind
Regards
James
James Pitchell |
McLarens
Executive Manager –
South West Commercial Property
McLarens
5th floor
Broad Quay House
Broad Quay
Bristol
BS1 4DJ
Office: 0117 457 9573
Mobile: +44 (0)7503
014123 |
PRIVACY STATEMENT: We are required to
capture and process personal information supplied to us in
the fulfilment of our services. Our obligations vary
depending on the jurisdiction involved. For further details
as to how this information is used, kept secure and your
rights, please see the relevant Privacy Statement on our
website – https://www.mclarens.com/privacy-policy/
From: Tarquin Management Ltd - Draycott Place <51dp@davylondon.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2025 11:39 PM
To: James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com>
Cc: Dominic Galvin <dgalvin@c-sr.com>
Subject: RE: Insurance Claim for Water Damage 51
Bray Place - Our Ref MUK.234380
Dear James, further to
exchanges in July, the inspection finally went ahead on 5
August but we have not heard anything further from you
following that inspection. I guess the information I was
given about the extent of the inspection and that
Dear James,
further to exchanges in July, the
inspection finally went ahead on 5 August but we have not
heard anything further from you following that inspection.
I guess the information I was given about
the extent of the inspection and that it involved all pipes
and take all day must be due to some mistake within the
Polygon system or the person who booked the appointments.
Ita all went smoothly on the day and done within a couple of
hours, possibly less, as far as the flat above/roof terrace
were concerned.
Have you received back the inspection
report? Would you be willing to share it so we can see if
there is anything more we should be doing, please?
Our handyman was on site to ensure access
in case of any issues and he reported back that the
inspection confirmed that any water entry did not, after
all, come from the upstairs rainwater drain. (Or perhaps not
anymore, if it ever did). From what we are told, it would
seem that the remaining moisture was coming in from the door
and doorframe boarded up from the inside but just with a
sheet of MDF, which I already mentioned previously. But
mainly from a brick air vent only accessible from the
entrance to Flat 1, which was overgrown with vegetation that
would pull in any water running down the wall at times of
rain. Is that what came back to you also?
Could you please update us on the
position of the claim?
I am not sure if there has been any
correspondence with Dominic but going forward we would be
grateful if you would copy us into any correspondence
between you about this claim and keep us informed of the
outcome of any oral discussions. (Dominic, that goes the
same for you. Please copy to us any correspondence with
James or the insurers on the subject.)
We look forward to hearing from you in
due course.
Regards
Mario Angiolini
for and on behalf of Tarquin Management
Ltd
On Tuesday, July 29, 2025 at 4:59:36 pm
+01:00, James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com>
wrote:
Dear Mario,
My email below is based on information provided to me by Polygon following their first failed visit, I have not made reference to closing the claim in anyway and have highlighted what is required from the Insured entity to progress matters. Your email below is the first I have heard of further appointments being made and cancelled and I shall follow this up with Polygon.
In regards to the tests I have not insisted on what you have stated below. My instruction to Polygon was to attend the property and undertake leak detection to ascertain the precise cause of the leak and I highlighted that it is believed to be emanating from rainwater collection goods although this has yet to be proven. It would however be prudent to undertake a full and detailed inspection to ensure that the cause is accurately diagnosed and there are no hidden issues that may be contributing or causing the water ingress in Mr Galvin’s flat.
As you can see from the email trail below, prior to appointing Polygon, I had requested details of the precise work the handyman had undertaken but this has not been forthcoming.
The matter has been outstanding for some time now and I am attempting to progress matters by arranging for one of Insurers preferred suppliers to attend and confirm the precise cause so this can be rectified and further damage occurring to your building can be prevented. This will then allow us to arrange the necessary internal repairs to Mr Galvin’s flat.
I trust this clarifies matters for you but please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further queries.
Kind Regards
James
James Pitchell | McLarens
Executive Manager – South West Commercial Property
McLarens
5th floor
Broad Quay House
Broad Quay
Bristol
BS1 4DJ
Office: 0117 457 9573
Mobile: +44 (0)7503 014123 |
PRIVACY STATEMENT: We are required to capture and process personal information supplied to us in the fulfilment of our services. Our obligations vary depending on the jurisdiction involved. For further details as to how this information is used, kept secure and your rights, please see the relevant Privacy Statement on our website – https://www.mclarens.com/privacy-policy/
From: Tarquin Management Ltd - Draycott Place <51dp@davylondon.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2025 9:57 AM
To: James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com>
Cc: Dominic Galvin <dgalvin@c-sr.com>
Subject: RE: Insurance Claim for Water Damage 51 Bray Place - Our Ref MUK.234380
Dear James, I am drafting this on my phone; so it might end up sending before i finish. It warrants a full factual response, as your confrontational stance seems entirely unjustified. I am not sure of what we owe the dubious pleasure of the
Dear James,
I am drafting this on my phone; so it might end up sending before i finish. It warrants a full factual response, as your confrontational stance seems entirely unjustified.
I am not sure of what we owe the dubious pleasure of the rather accusatory tone and threats to close the claim in you message from the other week. I did not want to reply in tone till the inspection had taken place, but things have dragged on longer than expected. We have now had 2 appointments cancelled/not gone ahead last week, so if you are looking for causes of the delay, you ought to look elsewhere.
The failed appointment on 14 July is no different. Next time, before making accusations and pointing fingers, I suggest you find out the full facts first.
At all times we have given Polygon maximum availability (essentially any day after around midday) and just requested at least 48 hour notice to liaise with the tenant and confirm. We do not continuously monitor email on this account, so sometimes there might be a delay in us picking up a message also. They have my number and that of my co-director in any event, so they can always call us for anything urgent.
Each time we spoke to Polygon to arrange the inspection they only ever seemed to have a single time slot available to offer, with very limited flexibility or none at all, that could only be blocked for a relatively short period of time for us to double check with the tenant and confirm. The first week they gave just over a day notice by email and we could not revert in time.
We then arranged with Grace for 14 July between 12pm and 2pm what I think would be an inspection lasting up to an hour of the area where the water had come in, towards the far end of the outside patio and around the drainhole where the rain from the back half of the roof of the entire building runs off.
.
Events on the day of the first appointment
What you report is not correct. Polygon arrived at the front of the building and rang a bell at 12:29:45. For privacy reasons the camera cannot see which bell is being used at all. They then left the front of the buliding and walked awaty at 12:42:16 for a total of 12.5 minutes not 2 hours waiting around (as per CCTV by the front door). They did not come back at a later time to ring the bell again and check if the tenant of the ground floor would answer.
The tenant was at home the whole time. CCTV shows him coming back from walking his dog just after 12:02 and not leave the building again till 17:36 to walk his dog again. He was painting in the basement room and it is possible he may not have heard the bell when they rang it. It is also possible they rang a wrong bell, as you refer to the "first floor flat", whereas this is ground floor and basement flat.
There is also a chance the doorbell might have malfunctioned, as it is long overdue to be replaced and has intermittent faults.
Their inspector since told me that no one answered the door so they the called a contact number they were given and left a message. They apparently went to sit in their vehicle in a nearby street and just waited there for someone to call them back once access was possible. The only numbers I had given Grace at Polygon were mine and my co-directors, but neither of us had any missed call, text message or voicemail about this on the day.
As the technicians did not call or text either of our numbers, they could have waited in the vehicle all they wanted, we would not know. Polygon have yet to clarify which phone number they used and who gave it to them.
Had they called the right number, as they had been instructed when booking the appointment, I could have sent our handyman over within about 30 minutes to arrange access. Clearly that was a mistake on their part.
Unlikely we will be able to establish for sure what happened on the day (wrong number, wrong doorbell, doorbell malfunction, freak accident, something else), but for both your reference and Dominic's, with separate accusations of his own, we respected our agreement on the day. It is unfortunate the inspections did not take place, and to avoid a repeat we agreed with the tenant that our handyman will attend on the day with keys, just in case there was a problem with the bell
The tone and threats from both of you are not particularly helpful or encourage cooperation. Next time maybe ask before you jump to conclusions. Besides, this was the first ever appointment arranged, not like there was a history of missed appointments, cancellations or impossible availability.
Access to Flat 1 generally
James, so you know, what has always proved difficult has been access to Flat 1 to inspect, carry out work or check current status. Dominic has always used the excuse he had no details for his tenant and had to go through the letting agent to justify not being able to arrange access. In the end our handyman just knocked on the door a few times over several days at the start of this year till someone answered. He explained why he was there and she allowed him to inspect the leak. He made arrangements directly with Dominic's tenant thereafter without problems till recently.
In light of your email, he has been trying to arrange a time with her to take updated moisture readings to check whether the leak may have reoccurred but, so far, this has not been possible.
Further inspection all-day appointments for 21 and 24 July cancelled by Polygon and/or Dominic
When we spoke to Polygon to rearrange the inspection, we were told that you had now changed this from just investigating the leak itselt, to an all-day inspection and tracing of all pipework and gas pipework of the entire flat. This will be very disruptive to the tenant of Flat 2, who will have to stay around the entire time but, we are told, that is what you are insisting on.
In the spirit of cooperation, we agreed with the tenant to allow this. I spoke to Grace on 17 July and arranged for the inspection to take place on 21 July starting between 9 and 10.30, as a later start time was not possible due to the all-day duration you had ordered. I checked the recording of the call and I made it very clear that the appointment should be treated as fully confirmed from us, not just blocked pending confirmation, and that we would arrange access in any event, even if the tenant were not available on the day..
I also asked for someone to call me back to explain what was involved in practice and why was this extensive survey needed a all for a leak from the far corner of an outside patio area . Polygon apparently misunderstood this and concluded that unless they provided this explanation and I approved, the inspection could not go ahead. I never suggested this. When they could not speak to me on 18 July, they therefore cancelled the inspection, but never notified us in any way of the cancellation.
On Monday 21 July both our handyman and the tenant in Flat 2 waited for the inspectors till gone lunchtime, in case they had been delayed, but no one turned up. When I later contacted Polygon I was told the appointment had been cancelled as above. Grace was not around on the day, so no additional information was available. Clearly, the tenant had to take time off to be able to be at the flat all day and we incurred the costs of our handyman attending this time. Would that be covered by the policy as part of track and trace or do we bear that cost ourselves?
We arranged a further appointment for 24 July starting from 8.30am, regularly confirmed by Polygon by email. This time we provided Polygoon with the numbers for the tenant, our handyman and myself in case of any problems on the day, with clear instructions in writing to contact the tenant first in any case, then the handyman and if neither were available or could resolve the issue, contact me.
I then received an SMS at 20:03 the night before the arranged inspection informing me the appoointment for the next morning was cancelled as Dominic was not available and asking me to inform the tenant. I only saw this in the morning, by what time the tenant had already cancelled commitments for the day to be at the property all day and our handyman was already on his way to the property. Again we would have avoided an unnecessary callout charge had Polygon followed instructions and contacted the tenant in the first place the evening before, but at least this time they contacted me to let me know of the cancellation.
Now you have the whole story to date, we would like an explanation of how a leak at the far end of Flat 1, next to the perimeter wall at the back of the building requires an all day survey of all water and gas pipes in the flat and the flat above, all the way to the front of the building, some 15 meters or so away from it? And how does gas come into it?
I can send you plans of the ground floor with what I believe id the approximate positioning of most pipework from entry point in the street at the front of the building to end use in both flats.
It is not a very complicated setup for both gas and water: two straight runs and 90 degree angles between ground floor and basement, then water and gas run down to Flat 1 at or near the supporting beam in the bedroom, the rest are under the screed in Flat 1. In flat 2 same two straight runs then split right and left for kitchen and shower room above the bedroom and two heating pipes running across the middle, or more more likely the outer edge of the upstairs living room (in Flat 1 it is living room, bathroom and hallway) as a loop with two radiators, one below the central bay window and one effectively above the inner wall of the bathroom. Flat 2 gas after the main runs 90 degrees to the left and then feeds gas hob and gas boiler.
That is the totality of the circuits. As I said, to avoid unnecessary arguments and delay we are agreeing to the all-day inspections you are requiring, but please avoid blaming us for delays that are not of our making.
We would invite you to consider whether you really need such a comprehensive survey, as we cannot think of any possible reason. Reverting to the previous shorter appointment would seem more efficient and probably quicker, but we leave this to you.
We will arrange alternative dates with Polygon, but the tenant for Flat 2 may be away at some point this week or next, he will let us know.
I look forward to any comments you may have.
Regards
Mario Angiolini
for and on behalf of Tarquin Management Ltd
On Tuesday, July 15, 2025 at 4:40:17 pm +01:00, James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com> wrote:
Dear Davy,
I understand that with all the necessary agreements in place Polygon attended yesterday, however despite being on site for over two hours the tenant of the first floor did not show or answer the number you provided. As such additional costs have now been added to the claim unnecessarily and we are no further forward with resolving the water ingress which is causing damage to the structure of the building.
The policy which the claim has been submitted under will contain certain terms and conditions and will include the Insured providing any information that Insurers require to validate and verify the claim. This matter has now been outstanding for over 12 months, further delays will prejudice Insurers position, as such please arrange contact with Polygon to rearrange the appointment and provide unrestricted access to enable us to make a full assessment of the cause of damage.
Kind Regards
James
James Pitchell | McLarens
Executive Manager – South West Commercial Property
McLarens
5th floor
Broad Quay House
Broad Quay
Bristol
BS1 4DJ
Office: 0117 457 9573
Mobile: +44 (0)7503 014123 |
PRIVACY STATEMENT: We are required to capture and process personal information supplied to us in the fulfilment of our services. Our obligations vary depending on the jurisdiction involved. For further details as to how this information is used, kept secure and your rights, please see the relevant Privacy Statement on our website – https://www.mclarens.com/privacy-policy/
From: James Pitchell
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2025 6:27 PM
To: 51dp@davylondon.net
Cc: Dominic Galvin <dgalvin@c-sr.com>
Subject: RE: Insurance Claim for Water Damage 51 Bray Place - Our Ref MUK.234380
Dear Davy,
Thank you for your email. I have instructed Polygon UK Ltd who initially inspected Mr Galvins’ flat to make the necessary arrangements, they will be in contact shortly.
Kind Regards
James
James Pitchell | McLarens
Executive Manager – South West Commercial Property
McLarens
5th floor
Broad Quay House
Broad Quay
Bristol
BS1 4DJ
Office: 0117 457 9573
Mobile: +44 (0)7503 014123 |
PRIVACY STATEMENT: We are required to capture and process personal information supplied to us in the fulfilment of our services. Our obligations vary depending on the jurisdiction involved. For further details as to how this information is used, kept secure and your rights, please see the relevant Privacy Statement on our website – https://www.mclarens.com/privacy-policy/
From: Tarquin Management Ltd <51dp@davylondon.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2025 7:04 AM
To: James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com>
Cc: Dominic Galvin <dgalvin@c-sr.com>
Subject: RE: Insurance Claim for Water Damage 51 Bray Place - Our Ref MUK.234380
Dear James, that sounds like a very sensible solution. I confirm we can arrange access to the terrace above, provided there is sufficient notice and the tenant confirms his availability. I would suggest the best way forward would be for you
Dear James,
that sounds like a very sensible solution. I confirm we can arrange access to the terrace above, provided there is sufficient notice and the tenant confirms his availability.
I would suggest the best way forward would be for you to provide me with a few possible days and times for the inspection and I will confirm with the tenant then revert to you.
Regards
Davy
On Tuesday, June 17, 2025 at 6:12:37 pm +02:00, James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com> wrote:
Dear Davy,
Thank you for your email.
I have discussed the matter further with Mr Galvin and he would be happy for a leak detection test to be undertaken which would involve cutting an access hole in the kitchen. This would involve us requiring access to the drain above at the same time and as such I welcome your confirmation that if I instruct the relevant company the necessary access can be provided so a detailed survey on all possible explanations of the water ingress can be concluded within one visit.
Kind Regards
James
James Pitchell | McLarens
Executive Manager – South West Commercial Property
McLarens
5th floor
Broad Quay House
Broad Quay
Bristol
BS1 4DJ
Office: 0117 457 9573
Mobile: +44 (0)7503 014123 |
PRIVACY STATEMENT: We are required to capture and process personal information supplied to us in the fulfilment of our services. Our obligations vary depending on the jurisdiction involved. For further details as to how this information is used, kept secure and your rights, please see the relevant Privacy Statement on our website – https://www.mclarens.com/privacy-policy/
From: Tarquin Management Ltd <51dp@davylondon.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2025 10:41 AM
To: James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com>
Cc: Dominic Galvin <dgalvin@c-sr.com>
Subject: RE: Insurance Claim for Water Damage 51 Bray Place - Our Ref MUK.234380
Dear James, Apologies for overlooking your request. Please note our new emails going forward for all matters relating to this building. Thanks for confirming the estimate was following an inspection, as from the leaseholder we got the impression
Dear James,
Apologies for overlooking your request. Please note our new emails going forward for all matters relating to this building.
Thanks for confirming the estimate was following an inspection, as from the leaseholder we got the impression that it was just a desk estimate. If insurers are happy with the amounts, it is not my role to disagree with them.
As for the repairs we arranged, the starting point has to be, of course, that the leaseholder has not authorised the ceiling to be opened up or cut out in any way to be able to fully inspect the section above and be able to pinpoint the cause/point or points of entry of the leak and fully assess the effectiveness of any remedial work done to date.
Our handyman could not identify any obvious point of entry from above so, as I think I mentioned, he did all he could from the outside sealing any visible cracks or defect in the grouting or cement around the drain hole, which takes the water from the entire back section of the roof of the building.
As the leaseholder maintained that the dampness derived from a defined incident rather than a gradual leak over a longer period, it is difficult to guess where it may have come in from or the exact cause.
At the link below you will find pictures of the moisture meter readings taken in April this year, around one month after the most recent work was done and after some fairly heavy rains. As you will see, the ceiling and the sections of wall nearest to the ceiling all have low humidity readings between 009 and 012.
The values increase as you go down the wall on the lightwell side to 029 and 031 halfway down the wall, near the window. The readings are from the grouting between mosaic tiles and our handyman indicated they may not be entirely accurate. It is not therefore clear whether there may be any ingress of water at all. The location seems to correspond roughly with a blocked off door on the outside wall (picture from the outside also enclosed). If there is any water ingress from the around the doorframe, this would be the responsibility of the leaseholder to repair.
The exposed boards on the wall on the side of the street, on the other hand, show dry readings.
Let me know if you require anything else in this respect. or if these photos are sufficient. Should you wish to inspect the drain hole upstairs, we will arrange access with the tenant of the ground floor flat.
Without cutting back the existing ceiling in Flat 1 to fully inspect the area above, there is little more we can arrange in terms of remedial work but if you would like to suggest what other work might be useful to undertake, we will certainly consider it.
Regards
Davy Thielens
for and on behalf of Tarquin Management Ltd
On Thursday, June 5, 2025 at 4:36:05 pm +01:00, James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com> wrote:
Dear Davy,
Further to my email below I cannot trace having received a response. Please can you provide the details as requested so we can look to progress the claim.
Kind Regards
James
James Pitchell | McLarens
Executive Manager – South West Commercial Property
McLarens
5th floor
Broad Quay House
Broad Quay
Bristol
BS1 4DJ
Office: 0117 457 9573
Mobile: +44 (0)7503 014123 |
PRIVACY STATEMENT: We are required to capture and process personal information supplied to us in the fulfilment of our services. Our obligations vary depending on the jurisdiction involved. For further details as to how this information is used, kept secure and your rights, please see the relevant Privacy Statement on our website – https://www.mclarens.com/privacy-policy/
From: James Pitchell
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 10:02 AM
To: Tarquin Management <tarquin.management@gmail.com>
Cc: Dominic Galvin <dgalvin@c-sr.com>
Subject: RE: Insurance Claim for Water Damage 51 Bray Place - Our Ref MUK.234380
Dear Davy,
Thank you for your email.
My colleague has visited this property and the reserve for the claim has been set following his attendance and that of a professional Disaster & Restoration company, Polygon UK Ltd. The damage is not just to ceiling but also affects the wall tiles and wall which to rectify will mean the removal of the kitchen wall units. There is also a provision within our reserve of alternative accommodation for the tenant. Depending on the extent of works required if the kitchen becomes unusable then the tenant may need to be decanted.
As the ceiling has not yet been removed, we do know the construction above the ceiling and the effect that a damp environment may have had on the building.
You have confirmed that your handyman has attended, are you able to confirm precisely what work he undertook other than apply some sealant. Has he undertaken any formal leak detection tests to determine whether it is indeed sealant around the drain that is the issue? Did he check all aspects of the rainwater collection system in place at the property. If so, please can you provide photographs or a formal report confirming the precise cause and work undertaken. Can you also confirm which areas he undertook moisture readings in.
If this is not available, it would be appreciated if we could be allowed access to the roof terrace to undertake a full investigation. This will also determine whether the actual cause maybe covered by the insurance policy in force and to ensure the property is watertight prior to commencing any drying work (if required).
Kind Regards
James
James Pitchell | McLarens
Executive Manager – South West Commercial Property
McLarens
5th floor
Broad Quay House
Broad Quay
Bristol
BS1 4DJ
Office: 0117 457 9573
Mobile: +44 (0)7503 014123 |
PRIVACY STATEMENT: We are required to capture and process personal information supplied to us in the fulfilment of our services. Our obligations vary depending on the jurisdiction involved. For further details as to how this information is used, kept secure and your rights, please see the relevant Privacy Statement on our website – https://www.mclarens.com/privacy-policy/
From: Tarquin Management <tarquin.management@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2025 5:58 AM
To: James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com>
Cc: Dominic Galvin <dgalvin@c-sr.com>
Subject: Re: Insurance Claim for Water Damage 51 Bray Place - Our Ref MUK.234380
Dear James, Apologies for the delay in replying, but I overlooked your email until a couple of days ago. I am wondering what you may have been told by the leaseholder and would like to know whether you have been out to the property to view the
Dear James,
Apologies for the delay in replying, but I overlooked your email until a couple of days ago.
I am wondering what you may have been told by the leaseholder and would like to know whether you have been out to the property to view the damage yet, as there seems to be some confusion as to the extent of the damage, investigation and remedial work already done so far.
It may be useful to touch base on the phone over the next few days to clarify a few things, as I am also slightly perplexed at the amount reserved for this claim. I am told it is over £30K, which seems way in excess of any reasonable amount for the damage I have seen (via video call) in the corner of the kitchen. Could I ask you how you arrived at that estimate figure please?
To be clear from the outset, we have always taken all necessary action to investigate and identify the cause of any damage in the building and rectify it within a reasonable time. That is what we have sought to do in this case. I think it will be useful for you to have a timeline of events:
February 2024 - Damage reported to us and to insurers by the leaseholder
February-March 2024 - Our handiman attends the property several times to review the damage and try to identify the cause. The leaseholder does not allow cutting out the damaged ceiling plaster to investigate properly where the dampness may be coming from, so it is not possible to pinpoint or narrow down the source internally. Our handiman can only examine the patio above from the outside, especially around the drain where the water from most of the roof of the building passes. He sealed all visible cracks and gaps, including in the short section of pipe buried in the floor (ceiling of the flat below), then connecting to the final section of downpipe. He returns about 10 days later, after heavy rain, to measure and the damp meter shows greatly reduced values, with the walls completely dry and the ceiling with some residual moisture, but clearly in the process of drying, even after heavy rain. The downpipe is cracked and needs replacing, but that is not the cause of the dampness in the kitchen.
March 2024: we believed the leak had been stopped and we left it to the leaseholder to sort out damage and remedial work with you. The leaseholder misunderstood and believed he was waiting for us to carry out further outside repairs. As we did not hear anything, we assumed all was going ahead normally.
21 October 2024: The leaseholder contactred us to find out when the work will be done. I explained it was already completed in March and asked our handyman to go to check if the dampness returned. On 22 October the leaseholder responded by text to our handyman, did not agree to allow access to check moisture and said: "Regarding checking the effectiveness of the repair, on the basis of my last inspection, this does seem fine, but the final decision should be in the hands of the insurance company". We heard nothing further and assumed all was going as planned and you had been asked to inspect the property. I am not sure if this happened or not yet.
21 February 2025: Leaseholder contacted us again to complain that the leak reappeared. He raised all kind of obstacles with going inside the flat and insisted that everything is done from the outside only. Our handyman attended the property on repeated occasions till the person renting the flat was around and allowed him to inspect the inside. He found the walls had remained dry as well as much of the ceiling but there was an area which still showed elevated moisture levels. Again, he was not allowed to cut back the ceiling plaster. He examined the drain above and applied multiple layers of sealing agent all round and to every visible crack or section of grouting that had come loose. He went to re-check dampness readings at the end of March, when everything was dry (readings of 10% or less) in all sections of the ceiling and adjacent walls. He then waited for some rain and for the tenant to be available, as she was not around earlier this month. He was able to go inside the flat again last Friday and confirmed that the humidity readings for the ceiling and immediately adjacent walls remain around or below the 10% mark. There are some slightly higher readings (early 20's) lower down, closer to the counter, but these would correspond with an entrance door to the flat no longer in use which has been boarded up from the inside by a previous leaseholder. If there is any ingress of water at that level, and I am not necessarily suggesting there is, it would be the responsibility of the leaseholder.
I trust the above is a sufficient summary and I will try to call you towards the end of the week.
Regards
Davy Thielens
for and on behalf of Tarquin Management Ltd
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 11:34, James Pitchell <james.pitchell@mclarens.com> wrote:
Dear sirs,
McLarens are loss adjusters acting on behalf of Zurich who insure the buildings at the above address for Tarquin Management Ltd. An ongoing leak is continuing to cause damage within Mr Galvin’s premises.
Please can you confirm what actions are being taken to resolve the leak. It is the Insureds (Tarquin Management Ltd) responsibility under the policy to mitigate any damage being caused and we would grateful if you can respond confirming the cause of the leak is being resolved.
Kind Regards
James
James Pitchell | McLarens
Executive Manager – South West Commercial Property
Pure Offices
Cheltenham Office Park
Hatherley Lane
Cheltenham
GL51 6SH
Office: 01242 801871
Mobile: +44 (0)7503 014123 |
PRIVACY STATEMENT: We are required to capture and process personal information supplied to us in the fulfilment of our services. Our obligations vary depending on the jurisdiction involved. For further details as to how this information is used, kept secure and your rights, please see the relevant Privacy Statement on our website – https://www.mclarens.com/privacy-policy/
