Consult your own insurance for advice.
If the sum to repair the roof is smaller than your excess, you might find it worthwhile to fight it yourself.
If the sum is larger than your excess and is not the same insurance company/grop, claim against your own insurer and let your insurer tackle their insurer.
Insurance companies know how to talk to each other.
I'll admit that it's just 2 small paint scratches that can be ignored actually. But what pisses me off is that initially management promise this and that then finally insurer just give weird reason that management did their regular checks hence no compensation. This makes no sense to me.
It is because management did their regular checks, that's why in the unforeseen situation whereby the light does drop then that is where the insurer compensates right?
If the insurance say they won't compensate because management didn't do due diligence to regularly check then at least I can accept this reason from insurer.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Either that or insurer say lights is not covered under the policy... This I also can accept.
This isn't just about lighting drop on car and car damage. What happens if someone was injured...
Are they gonna say the same thing and reject compensation?
every carpark always have a signboard disclaiming all management responsibility for any damage to any cars parked there
Ok fine, does that mean any damage that isn't caused by their management responsibility?
I mean if the car was vandalised by another person, ok of course management should not be responsible.
But if fixtures like lighting or maybe ventilation or air-con system fell on your car. How?
Condo car park is park at own risk. Think of it as same as parking in your own porch, as condo owner owns part of car-park. If park at own porch, and a light falls on car you will pay to repair both, right? Only difference is that condo MCST will pay to rectify light from common funds as is common property.
If damage to car is superficial, pay your own repairs out of pocket. Go small claims court, you have to spend time preparing own case, and attend hearing during office hours.
Well, I agree with you. But condo owners pay maintenance fees to management right. Hence regular checks and preventive maintenance should be done. And should something happen then the people in charge if the premises should be responsible no?
My real concern is safety. Safety of people walking through the area.
Agree, SCT is very effective when it comes to these sub 10k (unless you driving an Agera and your carbon fibre rood costs 50k to fix) claims.
You submit your written docs, get a date, make sure you turn up and explain your case politely to the person (are they magistrates?) you get your written judgement on the spot. If the condo mgmt. refuse to turn up, most likely your win 100%.
If ts car gets stolen while parked in the condo, is the management responsible ?
I won't say management is responsible. But if there is security available then I'll question management on what security is doing and if there is cctv footage things like that.
As I said earlier, vandalism and stolen I would question security but not put blame in management.
But damage caused by fixtures managed and maintained by management I would say they are responsible.
Or am I wrong to think this way?