Question:
Our client has claimed under their house insurance for a crack that has appeared in their concrete driveway. This has been caused by the root of a neighbour's tree growing beneath it.
The insurer wishes to decline it on the basis that "Whilst we understand that cracks can be sudden, the gradually growing roots beneath the driveway have caused the cracks and therefore there the policy does not respond".
The loss adjuster's report says: "We believe that the loss is not sudden and accidental as the growth of the tree root has a direct correlation to the growth of the tree, and as it has been there since before 2008, we believe that the cause relates to a gradually occurring deformation."
My argument is that a crack cannot by definition be gradual. Sure, the pressure that builds up leading to the crack could be, but the actual event itself has to be sudden. The cause is irrelevant?
Can the claim be declined because the event precipitating the sudden damage was gradual in nature?
Isn't it the same as if the gradual rusting of or pressure build up behind a blockage in an internal water pipe might lead to a sudden break and cause damage to surrounding property? That water damage would be considered sudden, even though the pressure building up within the blocked pipe might have been gradual? So the damaged property would be covered?
Crossley Gates replies:
Assuming the exclusion excludes gradual damage (and not gradual causes), the declinature is incorrect.
The damage claimed for is the crack in the concrete, and like all cracks, one minute it is not there and the next minute it is. The break in the concrete's internal strenght happens very quickly, revealing itself as a crack. This is the very opposite of gradual.
