Home / Disasters and Accidents / New Builds Flood: Insurers Say No Thanks
New Builds Flood: Insurers Say No Thanks
12 Feb
Summary
- New homes in Blyth flooded twice, leaving residents without insurance.
- Builders Gleeson allegedly breached planning conditions for drainage systems.
- New build owners after 2009 are excluded from affordable flood insurance schemes.
Residents of new-build properties in Blyth, Northumberland, are grappling with repeated flooding and an inability to secure home insurance. Danielle Smith's dream new build, purchased in 2020, was severely damaged in flash floods in April 2024. A subsequent flood six months later left her uninsured after her policy was not renewed due to flood risk. Eight other homes on the same estate also experienced significant damage.
Further investigation revealed that the street had a history of flooding, with evidence of surface water flooding in 2019, while the houses were still under construction. A government map designates the area as high risk for surface water flooding. Homeowners' Alliance spokesperson Paula Higgins questions the planning permission granted for these developments.
House builder Gleeson stated the development was not deemed a flood risk by the Environment Agency, but the agency noted their remit is limited to river and sea flooding, with surface water assessed by local authorities. Gleeson Homes reportedly breached planning conditions for over six years regarding the maintenance of underground drainage tanks on the Blyth estate and at nine other sites, including one in Chesterfield.
In Chesterfield, Storm Babet caused flooding in October 2023, affecting a long-standing property owned by Carlie Sivitter. Gleeson Homes attributed this flooding to a blocked valve, though Derbyshire County Council cited a complex issue.
A separate issue concerning new build quality is affecting homeowners nationwide. Daniel Bruce, who bought a new flat in Camden in 2019, has faced extensive structural defects, leaks, and fire safety issues. Despite a two-year builder warranty and a ten-year structural warranty, his warranty provider has not paid out, leaving him with significant personal expenses and unresolved issues. The developer and building company have engaged in disputes over responsibility for the defects, with regulatory bodies and the High Court involved in the ongoing saga.
