By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.


Insurance costs from two February storms could cost £425m in claims

The severe weather that brought heavy rain and strong winds across the UK and flooded hundreds of properties this month is estimated to cost in the region of £425m in insurance claims. 

Insurance analysts at PwC estimate that damage to homes, businesses and cars just from Strom Dennis last month could be up to £225m.

“There has been far more flood damage from Storm Dennis compared to Storm Ciara – which was mainly wind damage,” said Mohammed Khan, general insurance leader at PwC. 


The concern for many homeowners, including buy-to-let landlords, is that the continued rainfall means there was a risk of further flooding; bad news for insurance companies. 

Keith Pearlman, a partner at city law firm DMH Stallard and an expert in property-related disputes, commented: “Horrific weather, with the awful prospect of more to come in both the short and longer-term, continues to cause devastation to homes and businesses. 

“For those affected by the torrential downpours, immediate contact should be made with their insurers to check if in the most serious incidents of flooding of residential properties, they can be rehoused and that their furniture and belongings are covered by their policy.” 

Pearlman advises landlords to “take photos of all property damage, collate evidence of costs for individual items and keep detailed records of ongoing expenditure”. 

He added: “Keep a diary of events, it will prove helpful in the weeks to come.”

Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.

  • icon

    Surprised it's not a lot more!

  • icon
    • 21 February 2020 17:07 PM

    LL should be aware that they are NOT covered by the Flood Re scheme.
    There is simply no way I would EVER invest in any property that was at risk of flooding for the next 30 years.
    It is relatively easy to ascertain where such flood risk areas are.
    Quickest way to achieve this is to try and obtain an insurance quote from Aviva.
    They have the most comprehensive flood database.
    If Aviva are prepared to quote then it will be safe to invest.

  • icon

    Why not scrap HS2 (£100 billion project) and do all the Flood Defense's instead I am sure it would be far more beneficial to the country helping millions of people long term, who cares if it takes us 30 minutes extra to go to Birmingham or not. Then I am sure Aviva will look more kindly on your insurance Application.

  • icon
    • 21 February 2020 19:33 PM

    Allegedly HS2 is required for capacity rather than speed of journey.
    If it takes 30 mins less to reach London just means 30 mins extra in bed for a commuter from Birmingham.
    Not worth billions in taxpayer funding.
    Capacity is a different argument and could be considered ample justification for such vast expenditure.

    But clearly it is bonkers to build on areas prone to flooding.
    It is only because of excessive immigration and indigenous population growth amongst non-traditional British citizens that is causing exponential demand for housing especially in the SE.
    The UK needs a vastly smaller population such that building in flood prone areas is stopped.
    There is no space for building as most areas that remain available are subject to flooding.
    It is impossible to prevent flooding which is increasing as the climate changes which is NOTHING to do with man.
    It is just the climate..........it changes as it has done for aeons.
    Man will just to decide how much to spend on flood measures
    It is ultimately an economic choice.
    Rail travel is clearly the most effective way to move people around.
    The issue with rail is the horrendous cost of it which forces people to use cheaper flying and driving methods.

    There should be a national infrastructure policy to vastly increase and restore the rail network to pre-Beeching cuts.
    An affordable subsidised comprehensive rail service is what the UK needs.
    Consign cars to the driveway.

    I can't believe they built a housing development on an area they called Fishlake
    Surely to a developer and planners the clue was in the placename that there might be future issues with the wet stuff!!!
    LL need their heads examining if they stay invested in flood prone areas.
    They are not covered by Flood Re unlike residential homeowners.
    Flood Re is the only way to make it viable to insure residential properties in flood areas..

  • icon

    Hi Paul I take what you say on board but my view on capacity is different & haven't changed in 50 years whether it moving people or goods about, its all daft to my mind. I seen so many people over the years going from one Town to an other and other way around, same goes for with-in City's , say London huge numbers of people going East to west or South to North or which ever way ridiculous journeys unnecessarily so. people in same walk of life whether in business, office or trades people for similar work that they could have done on the door step virtually, the same goes for between towns. Surely its not beyond the wit of man to job swap now that for most part similar work terms, conditions and work pay rates. Just how many billions of hours would be saved travelling whether on Train or in vehicles and cut pollution no end, a great deal more than congestion penalties. People would have more time to spend with their Family's, the same goes for shipping goods about many things could be produced in factories locally, like in engineering industry instead of importing, of or even farming do we really need to import spuds etc. It should be so easy to set up the data Base already exists I am sure with HMRC they know who everyone is, where they live, what they do and where they work, how much they earn, are we really so stupid that we waste a huge amount of our lives, wearing ourselves out travelling to & fro at great expense.

    • 22 February 2020 23:54 PM

    Oh! I totally agree with your sentiments.
    Essentially your suggesting of localist solutions where we can all just walk to work.
    A nice Utopian idea abd whilst I'm no economic expert I'm sure things are as they due to economic and political circumstances.
    Commuting is a massively unproductive use of the labour force.
    Very few train passengers can afford the luxury of First Class to be able to work whilst travelling.

    You only have to look at the largest planned economy in the world; China to see that millions of Chinese commute and stay in the major cities and economic areas.
    The workers would much prefer to stay in their local areas but this doesn't happen.

    Most of my life I have needed to commute except the last few years when I was a 4 mins drive from work.

    But that was an exceptional situation.
    I'm afraid for the vast majority of the working population commuting is required.
    Indeed it is a massive waste of everybody's time but currently there is really no realistic alternative.

    It does seem that capacity of the rail network is something that many seem to accept is inadequate.
    Whether HS2 is an appropriate response in part to this alleged issue is another matter.
    But I do know where there are opportunities for stns and lines to be reactivated housebuilding will occur and perhaps employers will gravitate to such housing developments.

  • icon

    hs2 is all about building housing units

    capacity is a nonsense as is hs2 for anything train related

  • icon

    I believe the money for HS2 would certainly be far better spent on Flood defences, why not ask the huge numbers or people who's lives are affected & their Homes ruined again & again. When I go on Train or Tube,(if I can get on there). I see the droves of people going in opposite directions, the same goes for road traffic it makes no sense, job match / job swap has to have huge potential to stop all this unnecessary travel, waste of resources, traffic pollution, environment as they talk about saving the Planet. 100 billion £'s saved by not doing HS2 (probably more than that no Government project knows how to keep to Budget anymore) would put a stop to so many areas getting flooded saving Lives, Homes, Farm Land, crops, environment, Life Stock and farm land. I think flood defences can usually be quiet easy to do but don't ask highly educated Digital Academics they'll put the mockers on it. I worked on the banks of the Thames many years ago and they were hydraulic driving heavy duty steel interlocking piles, seemed very simple, water tight & effective with very little noise, methods and equipment will have improve since so just do it. Regarding building on flood areas it shouldn't happen but when it does Planners can cause many problems, like making a Developer work to a datum much too low, in some cases a couple of more rows of blocks below DPC would be sufficient to raise it up and possibly escape the flood entering the property. Apart from all this but alas too late stop American style Farming removing too many ditches, hedge rows that used to restrict the rain water run off and peregrinate gradually.


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up