Orihuela Costa (+34) 645 652 688
Local Tariff (From UK) 02037347116

Want us to call you?

We call you!, Give us your tel. number.


Ask us

Professional Advice

Foro seguro de Hogar: Rotura en tragaluz

David King

Good afternoon, I have a home insurance policy with Allianz, to whom I have made a claim due to the break of a printed methacrylate that I have located in a skylight from the roof. I called the Insurance Company and they told me that I should talk to my Insurance Broker as I am not cover due to the limit in my aesthetic damage cover up to 2500 € and I do not understand why. Is this correct?

Thanks, regards.

Moderator, Sergio Sanguino

Hi David,

The burst of skylight from the roof should be cover through the glass breakage, crockery etc. You have to go to the General Terms and Conditions of the policy contracted to check the coverage of that guarantee where the materials are covered (such as glass, sanitary ware, ceramic glass etc) will be described. Nowadays, most of Home Insurance policies include methacrylate, either directly or as similar to the crystals materials.

Please note that if breakage has occurred for unknown causes, due to its own reasons, defect of the methacrylate or it has been another reason like hail or vandalism, for example…The claim would be covered by those guarantees directly, and not through the glass breakage warranty .

Kind regards

Sergio S

Pregunte al Administrador: Gastos de ascensor

Jordi Palat

I am owner of a flat in a building of five floors of old construction in Girona.  Finally, we have elevator.  However, now the owners of the groundfloors, refuse to contribute to the costs of this new element.  It is true that the lift will be used by the dwellings of other floors, but are they legal to say not to include them in this expenditure?

Thank you in advance

Administrator; Juan López

If the installation of the lift is a reality,  there has been an agreement on board backed the legal quorum (though simple majority for the rest of the territory, after the law 8/2013) which requires total majority in the CC CAT., and that the location of the same does not affect any neighbor with respect to housing settings. Article 9.2 of the LPH is very strong and has simplified many disputes, establishing that the non-use of a service does not exempt from the payment of the corresponding expenditure.   It is not the use that will make each owner of the common service, but the fact of having this service to use it when you want to.

While it is true that a community of neighbors must find a model of efficient and friendly management.  I don’t know if you have been advised before investing, in terms of the grants available in your autonomous community.  Management commitment and good work, does not usually generate conflicts, and less even when what is happening in your building is that have achieved progress. Notice that the jurisprudence also advanced by putting in place the crieterio that the lift is not an ornament, but a necessary element for the proper habitability of the house and its installation removes architectural barriers.