A secondary school teacher and his family have been left homeless and facing a bill of more than £250,000 after a loft extension collapsed, leaving five people injured, and the builder’s insurer refused to pay out because of outstanding county court judgments (CCJs).
James Hobby, from Windsor, employed a sole trader through the online recommendation service Ratedpeople.com to carry out a £38,000 dormer extension. Eight weeks into the work, the chimney collapsed, destroying the rooms below. Mr Hobby’s son was among those injured, two seriously. The builder had full public liability insurance with Direct Line, but when he made a claim, the insurer declared the policy invalid, stating he had failed to disclose three CCJs, including one for an unpaid parking ticket.
Direct Line refunded the builder’s premiums and cancelled the policy, leaving Mr Hobby to foot the entire bill for clearing the rubble and rebuilding his home. His own insurer also refused to pay, saying liability for accidental damage during renovations rests with the contractor. The family has had to move into temporary accommodation.
“The impact on us as a family has been terrible,” said Mr Hobby. “We’ve been left to pick up the pieces by ourselves.” He had checked the builder’s insurance certificate and obtained three references before hiring him, but was unaware of the CCJs.
The case highlights the difficulty homeowners face in verifying that a builder’s insurance will cover them if a job goes wrong. Brian Berry, chief executive of the Federation of Master Builders, said: “A homeowner can ask to see copies of public liability insurance, but will be unlikely to know the terms and in what instances it would not apply.” Ratedpeople.com said it had since strengthened its vetting procedures to check for personal CCJs, not just those against a business name.
Mr Hobby said he feels he has run out of options and cannot refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman as the policy was in the builder’s name. Direct Line declined to comment on whether it performs credit checks or why it took six months to consider the claim.
