A plumber came out the other day to give a quote on the work in my rehab, and he said that there's only one insurer (that he knows of) that will insure against damage caused by PEX plumbing. Sure enough, our insurance company won't cover damage caused by water damage from PEX.
We spoke to our insurance company, and they said that they don't cofer any damage caused by failed PEX plumbing. They also said that PEX plumbing "reduces their coverage options" and that many companies in Florida won't underwite insurance on houses with PEX.
Has anyone else come across this? One plumber who gave an estimate only works in PEX, so this seems like a big gap. For this particular house, I don't know how big of a deal it is, but I could see where it could be.
That just seems odd! PEX seems to be the logical choice when it comes to plumbing. I'll have to make sure I hear some follow up on this one.
Steven J., Will See Real Estate | 240‑394‑5733 | http://WillSeeRealEstate.com
I'm pretty sure we're going to go with PEX in any case, but I don't know about what it will end up meaning for insurance purposes long term.
It's interesting that they had no problems insuring 70-year old galvanized plumbing that is already leaking but won't insure PEX.
in my area the plumbing problems are caused by the grey colored quest pipe
pex is the plumbers choice here
good luck @Kent Verge
Yeah this is a little confusing to me... I just did an entire swap out from polybutelene (sp?) plumbing to PEX. This was also permitted for and passed county inspection. The issues I have heard of is with the polybutelene not with PEX. I am in Florida. I couldn't imagine that inspectors would pass this as it is acceptable for code and insurance companies give you a problem. @ Kent Verge now you have me a little concerned.
interesting article on subject.
I found a link to Universal Property's underwriting guidelines for Florida:
It says, "No Pex Plumbing (except HO8 & DP1) Except: 2010 or newer homes." This looks like coverage would be available, but only in certain rate classes or for newer homes. There were issues with a certain class of fittings prior to 2010, so this may be the explanation. What's strange, however, is that it doesn't include replumbing a house built prior to 2010 with PEX.
From an underwriting document from Tower Hill Insurance (https://oasis.thig.com/chore/help/Getting_Started_...):
"PEX, cross-linked polyethylene, piping is not acceptable. Our extensive claims data indicated that PEX piping is prone to leaking and often results in significant water damage. Please review 4-point inspections and do not submit risks with PEX pipes."
I'll keep digging.
Originally posted by @Kent Verge :
What's strange, however, is that it doesn't include replumbing a house built prior to 2010 with PEX.
Yeah that is strange. I would have to fully believe that my plumber would not have re-plumbed the house with PEX and have it pass inspection if it is a liability. This is the exact reason we replaced the poly. Although I have a slight doubt as this plumber has been very unreliable timeline wise...
News to me. Don't know if @Steve Babiak might know about or heard of this??
PEX is used in new construction everywhere around here. In CA, I could maybe see... because of earthquakes. But FL?
You must be a BiggerPockets member to post on the forums
Join the world's largest, most open Real Estate Investing Community online, 100% free forever!