Aviva Home Insurance Reviews

We made a claim for water damage resulting from a broken hose on the washing machine in our second-floor laundry room. The contractor responded quickly with the delivery of a dehumidifier, but that dehumidifier stayed in our dining room for months despite frequent calls to you and the contractor. It was finally removed when we threatened to sell it. The insurance agent and the contractor then stated that our ceiling had been stippled and the ceiling damage was a result of removal of this stipple, not water damage. This was false as the house was built in 2010 and the builder testified that no ceiling was stippled; however, both the insurance agent and the contractor steadfastly held on to this claim that this did not represent water damage. The water damage was eventually repaired, but suboptimally. The subcontractor remarked to us at the time that he was only allowed to put two coats of paint on the repair because the insurance company and contractors had stated that they would not pay for a third coat which would result in a normal-appearing ceiling rather than a defective ceiling. Subsequent to this repair, secondary lesions developed. We had a second contractor inspect the ceiling and he noted a tide mark extending beyond the kitchen into the hallway leading to our ground-level bathroom. Both the insurance agent and contractor stated that they did not believe the second contractor because they could not understand how this could happen; note that our trust levels were not high as these were the same people who stated, despite all evidence to the contrary, that our ceiling had been stippled. Furthermore, both the insurance agent and contractor should be well aware of hydrodynamics. I suspect the insurance agent and the selected contractor were in cahoots and that no one was representing our interests.