After a leak from the flat above, an Edinburgh homeowner received an AXA settlement offer of just over £3,000 for water damage to their property.
The property was a ground-floor flat in a traditional flatted building in the Marchmont and Meadows area of Edinburgh. Like many older Edinburgh properties, it had period construction, high ceilings, lath and plaster, decorative finishes, and rooms where water damage can travel further than is immediately visible.
The client was concerned that the offer did not reflect the true cost of putting the property back to its pre-loss condition. They contacted PCLA for independent advice before accepting the insurer’s offer.
Following our inspection, moisture readings, photographs, and a full costed scope of works, AXA appointed their own loss adjuster. After a joint inspection and review of our costs, AXA accepted the reinstatement scope. The client then accepted the settlement offer.
This case shows why homeowners should be careful before accepting a low water damage settlement, especially where the property has older construction, high-specification finishes, or hidden moisture.
Case Summary
| Detail | Information |
|---|---|
| Location | Marchmont and Meadows, Edinburgh |
| Property type | Ground-floor flat in a traditional flatted building |
| Claim type | Water damage from a leak in the flat above |
| Insurer | AXA |
| Initial offer | Just over £3,000 |
| Main concern | The offer did not appear to reflect the full reinstatement cost |
| PCLA action | Site inspection, moisture readings, photographs, costed scope of works, and joint inspection |
| Scoped building works | £30,054.65 before preliminaries |
| Outcome | AXA accepted the scope and the client accepted the settlement offer |
Why the Homeowner Contacted PCLA
The claim had already been ongoing for some time before PCLA became involved.
AXA had reviewed the damage remotely using photographs and videos supplied by the policyholder. Remote claim handling can be useful for straightforward, low-value damage, but it has limitations where water has affected ceilings, wall plaster, coving, flooring, hidden voids, or older building materials.
Following the remote review, AXA made an offer of just over £3,000.
The client was not satisfied that this reflected the true extent of the damage or the likely cost of reinstatement. They were concerned that accepting the offer could leave them unable to complete the repairs properly.
That is when they contacted PCLA.
The Problem: Water Damage from the Flat Above
The damage was caused when a pipe in the upstairs property allowed water to escape into our client’s flat below.
Understandably, the client’s first instinct was that the owner of the upstairs property should be responsible. However, in this type of situation, it is not usually enough to show that the leak came from another flat. There normally needs to be evidence that the upstairs owner or occupier was at fault.
That may include evidence that they knew about the leak and ignored it, failed to maintain pipework they knew was defective, or did not take reasonable steps once they became aware of the problem.
In this case, the practical route was to notify the client’s own insurer, AXA, under their home insurance policy. The claim was treated as an escape of water claim, with the focus on proving the full extent of insured damage and the proper cost of reinstatement.
This is general information, not legal advice. The correct route will depend on the policy, the cause of the leak, and the evidence available.
For homeowners facing a similar situation, our Escape of Water Insurance Claims guide explains how these claims are usually assessed and why evidence matters.
What Made This Claim More Complex
This was not a simple case of surface staining.
The property had older construction and higher-specification finishes that needed to be assessed properly. The ceilings were lath and plaster. The walls were finished in wall plaster and decorated using Farrow & Ball paint. The bathroom was tiled to approximately three-quarter height, with the remaining wall areas painted. Laminate flooring ran continuously from the hall through to the lounge.
Clear water staining was visible to the ceilings and adjacent coving. Staining was also evident to plastered walls in the bathroom, hall, and living room.
Most importantly, moisture readings showed that the damage was more extensive than could be seen from photographs alone.
Where moisture remains trapped in ceilings, wall plaster, floors, or hidden areas, a cosmetic repair is often not enough. If the drying, strip-out, and reinstatement scope is understated, the homeowner can be left with ongoing damp, failed decoration, damaged finishes, or further disruption later.
PCLA’s Initial Review
We first spoke with the client by phone to understand what had happened and what stage the claim had reached.
During that call, we discussed:
- where the leak had come from;
- which rooms had been affected;
- what AXA had already done;
- whether an offer had been made;
- why the client felt the offer was too low;
- whether the visible damage matched the insurer’s assessment.
Following that call, we arranged to inspect the property.
We attended within 24 hours.
Our inspection identified damage and reinstatement requirements that were not reflected in the £3,000 offer.
What We Found at the Property
During the inspection, we reviewed each affected room and recorded the visible damage.
We also used a moisture meter to test affected areas and photographed the readings. These readings showed significantly elevated moisture levels in parts of the property.
The damage affected several areas, including the bathroom, hall, lounge, and front lounge. The claim needed to account not only for visible staining, but for the proper sequence of drying, strip-out, repair, and reinstatement.
The original offer did not properly reflect the construction type, the specification of finishes, the continuity of flooring, or the moisture evidence.
What PCLA Did
PCLA prepared and submitted a detailed costed scope of works to AXA, supported by photographs and evidence from the site inspection.
Our work included:
- Reviewing the insurer’s initial offer and the history of the claim.
- Inspecting the affected rooms in person.
- Recording visible water staining and affected finishes.
- Taking and photographing moisture readings.
- Identifying construction details, including lath and plaster ceilings.
- Preparing a room-by-room reinstatement scope.
- Submitting the costed schedule to AXA.
- Meeting AXA’s loss adjuster at the property.
- Walking the loss adjuster through the damage, evidence, and reinstatement requirements.
This gave AXA a clear, evidence-led basis for reviewing the claim.
The Full Scope of Works
The scope included works across the bathroom, hall, lounge, and front lounge. It addressed not only redecoration, but the proper sequence of strip-out, drying, repair, and reinstatement required to put the property back to its previous condition.
The schedule included items such as:
- protection and relocation of furniture;
- electrical disconnection and reconnection;
- plumbing works to allow reinstatement;
- removal of damaged lath and plaster ceilings;
- removal and replacement of affected ceiling insulation;
- removal and reinstatement of wall plaster;
- removal and replacement of bathroom tiling;
- treatment and drying works;
- replacement of affected laminate flooring;
- reinstatement of coving, skirtings, lining paper, and decoration;
- final cleaning and making good.
The scoped building works were far beyond the original £3,000 offer. Our schedule identified £30,054.65 in building reinstatement works before preliminaries.
AXA Appointed a Loss Adjuster
After receiving PCLA’s findings and costed scope, AXA appointed a loss adjuster to inspect the property.
We met the loss adjuster on site and walked them through the full extent of the damage. This included the visible staining, affected rooms, construction details, decorative finishes, flooring, and moisture evidence.
The loss adjuster accepted the extent of the damage.
AXA’s surveyor then reviewed PCLA’s costs. Around one week later, AXA confirmed that the costs had been accepted.
The client then accepted the settlement offer.
Why the Original Offer Was Too Low
This case does not mean that every remote assessment is wrong. However, it does show the risk of relying on photographs and videos alone for a water damage claim in an older property.
The original offer did not properly reflect:
- the lath and plaster ceilings;
- the moisture levels within the affected areas;
- the extent of wall plaster damage;
- the bathroom tiling and decoration specification;
- the continuous laminate flooring;
- the need for a proper room-by-room reinstatement schedule;
- the labour, access, protection, and sequencing required.
A water damage claim is not just about what can be seen in a photograph. It is about what work is actually required to reinstate the property properly.
That is why a professionally prepared scope of works can make such a difference.
This Case May Be Relevant If
You may want to have your claim reviewed if:
- your insurer has made a low offer after a remote assessment;
- water has come from a flat above;
- your property has older construction, lath and plaster, decorative coving, or continuous flooring;
- the damage appears to affect more rooms than the insurer has allowed for;
- you are unsure whether moisture is still present;
- you have not accepted the insurer’s offer as a final settlement.
A review does not commit you to challenging the insurer. It helps you understand whether the offer reflects the likely cost of reinstatement before you make a decision.
What Homeowners Can Learn from This Claim
This claim highlights several important points for homeowners dealing with water damage in Edinburgh or elsewhere in Scotland.
First, if a leak comes from the flat above, that does not automatically mean you can recover the cost directly from the upstairs owner. Unless there is clear evidence of fault, your own insurer may be the more practical route.
Second, do not assume an insurer’s first offer reflects the full cost of repair. This is particularly important where the claim has been handled remotely.
Third, older properties need careful assessment. Lath and plaster ceilings, decorative coving, tiled bathrooms, plastered walls, and continuous flooring can all affect the correct reinstatement scope.
Fourth, moisture evidence matters. Readings taken with a moisture meter can help prove that the damage is more extensive than surface staining alone.
Finally, you can still appoint a loss assessor after an offer has been made, provided the claim has not been finally settled.
For a fuller explanation of when independent help may be worthwhile, read our guide: Do I Need a Loss Assessor for My Home Insurance Claim?
Have You Received a Low Offer for a Water Damage Claim?
If your insurer has made an offer that does not feel right, do not accept it without understanding the full cost of reinstatement.
PCLA acts for policyholders, not insurers. We inspect the damage, prepare evidence, produce a costed scope of works, and negotiate with the insurer or their appointed loss adjuster on your behalf.
We help homeowners across Edinburgh and Scotland with water damage, escape of water, fire, storm, and other property damage claims.
If you need help with an AXA water damage claim, or with any insurer’s offer following a leak from a flat above, speak to our Edinburgh loss assessor team or visit our Water Damage Claims Edinburgh page.
You can also read more about what happens when you appoint PCLA as your loss assessor.
FAQs
Can I claim against the upstairs flat if their leak damages my property?
Possibly, but it is not automatic. You would usually need evidence that the upstairs owner or occupier was at fault. For example, they may have ignored a known leak, failed to maintain defective pipework, or failed to take reasonable action once they became aware of the problem.
If the leak was sudden and accidental, your own home insurance policy may be the more practical route. Your insurer can then consider whether there is any recovery action against another party.
This is general information only and should not be treated as legal advice.
Can I challenge AXA’s offer for a water damage claim?
Yes, provided you have not accepted the offer as a final settlement. The key is evidence.
A challenge is much stronger when supported by a proper inspection, photographs, moisture readings, and a detailed costed scope of works.
Is a remote video assessment enough for a water damage claim?
Sometimes, but not always.
Remote assessments can miss hidden moisture, older construction issues, continuity of flooring, damage behind finishes, and the true scope of reinstatement. In more complex claims, a physical inspection is often essential.
Why do moisture readings matter?
Moisture readings help show whether water has travelled into ceilings, walls, floors, or other materials.
This can prove that the repair works need to go beyond surface decoration.
Can PCLA help after the insurer has already made an offer?
Yes. PCLA can step in after an insurer has made an offer, provided the claim has not been finally settled.
We can inspect the property, review the offer, prepare evidence, and negotiate with the insurer on your behalf.
What evidence helps challenge a low water damage offer?
Useful evidence may include photographs, moisture readings, a room-by-room schedule of damage, details of affected finishes, contractor input, and a properly costed scope of works.
The stronger the evidence, the easier it is to show why the original offer does not reflect the true reinstatement cost.
Does PCLA help with water damage claims in Edinburgh?
Yes. PCLA helps homeowners in Edinburgh and across Scotland with water damage, escape of water, fire, storm, flood, and other property damage insurance claims.
Our role is to act for the policyholder, prepare the claim properly, and negotiate with the insurer or their appointed representatives.
