Independent Evidence on What Actually Caused the Damage
Where a property claim is disputed, the contested issue is usually causation — whether the damage came from an event or from a defect, whether the mechanism alleged is physically possible, and whether the proposed repair addresses it. Building Pathology Diagnostics investigates the building independently — the defects, the damage mechanisms and the causation — and reports the answer with the evidence it rests on.
Independent technical investigation of the building only. Building Pathology Diagnostics is not an insurer, loss adjuster or claims manager, does not handle, progress or negotiate the claim itself, and does not act as a claimant representative.
What We Are, and What We Are Not
Stated plainly, at the top, because it governs everything below. Our value in a claim comes from being independent of it.
- — An independent building-pathology practice supplying technical diagnostics and evidence.
- — Instructed to investigate the building — its defects, damage mechanisms and causation — where those questions are relevant to an insurance claim.
- — Instructable by any party that needs independent technical analysis — policyholder, landlord, leaseholder, managing agent, solicitor, insurer or loss adjuster.
- — Independent technical opinion within the practitioner’s expertise and instructed scope: conclusions follow the evidence, not the instruction.
- — Explicit about limitations — where the evidence does not support a conclusion, the report says so.
- — Not an insurer, and not an agent or representative of any insurer.
- — Not a loss adjuster or loss assessor.
- — Not a claims management company, claims handler or claims manager. We do not investigate, handle, progress or negotiate the claim itself — we investigate the building.
- — Not a claimant representative or advocate, and not a negotiator on any party’s behalf.
- — Not affiliated with, endorsed by, or part of the Financial Ombudsman Service. Building Pathology Diagnostics is independent of it.
- — Not a provider of legal advice, and not a mediator, arbitrator, adjudicator or expert determiner.
- — Not a decision-maker on policy cover, policy wording or liability — those remain matters for the insurer and the instructing party’s legal adviser.
What We Investigate
One investigation of the building, built to answer the technical questions on which a disputed cause of damage actually turns.
Cause-of-Damage / Root-Cause Investigation
Systematic investigation of what actually caused the damage, traced as a chain of causation from the reported symptom back to the physical source. The finding is stated with the evidence it rests on, and with its limitations recorded.
Defect vs Event-Related Damage Analysis
Separating damage arising from an inherent or maintenance-related defect from damage arising from a discrete event, and identifying where both are present. Distinguishing pre-existing defect, deterioration and event-related damage can be technically important when the building evidence is considered in the context of an insurance claim.
Moisture and Thermal Evidence
Moisture measurement using professional diagnostic equipment, and thermal imaging where conditions make the results meaningful, recorded with ambient data. Used to support or test a hypothesis — never as a standalone diagnosis, and never where site conditions would make the reading unreliable.
Review of Insurer, Loss-Adjuster and Previous Technical Evidence
Technical review of the reports already on file — adjuster and surveyor findings, contractor opinions, specialist testing, repair history. We assess whether the stated conclusions are supported by the evidence produced, and identify what is missing.
Competing-Causation Analysis
Where more than one credible cause exists, each is set out with the evidence for and against it, together with the technical contribution of each where several operate together, and the tests or opening-up that would separate them.
Remedial Scope Definition
Definition of the remedial scope that the diagnosis actually requires, structured so it can be priced, compared against a proposed scope, and challenged or defended on technical grounds rather than assertion. Repair-scope and schedule-of-rates support where a relevant schedule is supplied or agreed for the instruction.
Evidence Prepared for the Instructing Party to Use
Technical reporting written to be legible to a policyholder, a solicitor, an insurer or a loss adjuster, and suitable for consideration in an insurance complaint, including matters referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service — without changing its conclusions to suit the audience.
Who Instructs This Work
Any party needing an independent technical answer can instruct. The conclusions do not change with who does.
Policyholders and Homeowners
Where damage has been attributed to a cause the policyholder does not accept, and an independent technical position on the cause of that damage is needed.
Landlords, Leaseholders and Managing Agents
Where responsibility for a defect sits between demise boundaries, building policies and repairing covenants, and the technical cause has to be established first.
Solicitors
Where a technical evidence base is required before, alongside or independently of proceedings. Court expert appointments are instructed separately.
Insurers and Loss Adjusters
Where an independent second technical opinion, a specialist causation investigation, or a review of a contested scope is required.
How the Investigation Runs
- 01
Instruction and Scope Definition
The technical question in dispute is defined in writing, with the parties, the documents available and any deadline. Scope, fee and turnaround are confirmed before work begins.
- 02
Document and Evidence Review
Review of the technical material on file: adjuster and surveyor reports, specialist testing, contractor opinions, photographs, repair and maintenance history. Technical content only — policy interpretation is not within our role.
- 03
Site Investigation
Independent inspection of the property and the affected fabric, with moisture measurement, thermal imaging and ambient recording where conditions make them meaningful. Where opening-up or laboratory testing is technically necessary, it is identified and justified rather than assumed.
- 04
Causation Analysis
The chain of causation is traced from symptom to source. Defect-related and event-related contributions are separated, gradual deterioration is distinguished from discrete ingress, and pre-existing damage is distinguished from new damage.
- 05
Testing the Competing Explanations
Each credible alternative cause is tested against the physical evidence rather than dismissed. Where the available evidence cannot separate two explanations, that is stated, along with what would.
- 06
Reporting
A technical report setting out findings, the reasoning behind them, the evidence relied on, the remedial scope indicated and the limitations that apply. The SEE THE DEFECT visualisation add-on may be instructed alongside it.
See the DefectForensic Defect Visualisation
Technical findings fail for a mundane reason: the reader cannot picture the defect. A claims handler, an adjuster, a solicitor or a judge is asked to accept a mechanism they cannot see, described in language built for other surveyors. SEE THE DEFECT takes the diagnosis your report has already reached and renders it as one continuous visual chain, so the reasoning can be followed without a building-pathology background.
- Source
- Mechanism
- Pathway
- Affected Fabric
- Symptom
- Remedial Intervention
- 01
Source
Where does it start?
The origin of the driver acting on the building — rainwater, ground water, a plumbing or drainage escape, internally generated moisture, a thermal gradient, an applied load or a movement stimulus. The source is identified as a located, physical thing, not a general category.
- 02
Mechanism
How does it act?
The physical process by which the source acts on the fabric — capillary transport, hydrostatic or wind-driven pressure, gravity flow, vapour diffusion, surface or interstitial condensation, thermal bridging, differential movement, corrosion expansion. The mechanism is what a remedial scope has to defeat.
- 03
Pathway
How does it travel?
The route the mechanism follows through the construction — the failed detail, junction, cavity, void, service penetration, bridged DPC, saturated bed joint or unsealed abutment. The pathway explains why damage appears where it does, and often nowhere else.
- 04
Affected Fabric
What is being damaged?
The specific elements and materials receiving the effect — plaster, timber, insulation, fixings, finishes, structure. Recorded as extent and condition, so material damage can be separated from cosmetic disturbance and from pre-existing deterioration.
- 05
Symptom
What can be seen?
What the occupier reports and the photographs actually show — staining, tide marks, mould, blistering, salting, cracking, spalling, decay, odour. The symptom is the end of the chain, not the beginning; it is the least reliable place to start a diagnosis and the place most reports stop.
- 06
Remedial Intervention
What actually fixes it?
The point in the chain at which the intervention breaks the mechanism, and the technical reason a scope stopping short of that point will not hold. This is where scope disagreements are usually resolved or exposed.
- — It explains a diagnosis already reached and approved in the technical report. It is not itself a diagnostic method.
- — It generates no findings of its own — every element traces back to a stated finding in the report.
- — It does not establish, prove or strengthen causation. Causation is established by the investigation and the evidence, not by the illustration of it.
- — Where the report qualifies a finding or records a limitation, the visualisation carries the same qualification.
- — It is not a substitute for the report, and it is not issued on its own.
Technical Dispute Support
Where parties disagree over causation, remedial scope or the adequacy of a repair, the disagreement is usually technical before it is anything else. We narrow it to the specific technical points in issue and set out what the evidence does and does not support.
- — Technical review of an opposing position — what it asserts, and whether its own evidence supports it.
- — Identification of the specific points on which two technical positions actually diverge, as distinct from where they merely use different language.
- — Assessment of whether a proposed remedial scope addresses the diagnosed mechanism, or only its symptom.
- — Identification of the investigation, opening-up or testing that would resolve the disagreement on evidence.
- — Clear written technical reasoning, suitable for consideration in an insurance complaint, including matters referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service. How and whether it is used is the instructing party's decision.
- — We do not mediate, arbitrate, adjudicate or determine anything between parties.
- — We do not decide who is right, apportion liability, or negotiate outcomes.
- — We do not represent or advocate for a party — our conclusions do not change with who instructs us.
- — Each party remains responsible for its own commercial and legal position.
What You Receive
- — Independent technical report on cause, extent and remedy
- — Chain-of-causation analysis with the supporting evidence identified
- — Photographic evidence plates with location referencing
- — Moisture, thermal and ambient records where readings were taken
- — Technical commentary on previous reports and on any contested scope
- — Remedial scope definition, with repair-scope and schedule-of-rates support where a relevant schedule is supplied or agreed for the instruction
- — Stated limitations, assumptions and any further investigation recommended
- — Optional: SEE THE DEFECT forensic defect visualisation plates
Instructed under Tier 3A on the services and pricing schedule. All fees exclude VAT where applicable.
CPR Part 35 Expert Appointments Are Separate
The work on this page is instructed as independent technical investigation of building defects, damage mechanisms and causation. It is not a CPR Part 35 expert appointment and does not become one by implication.
Where BPD is separately instructed to provide expert evidence for civil proceedings, the expert’s duty is to help the court on matters within their expertise, and that duty overrides any obligation to the person from whom instructions are received or by whom the expert is paid. CPR Part 35 and Practice Direction 35 apply to that separate instruction. It is confirmed separately, in writing, before any such work begins.
CPR Part 35 Expert Witness Reports →Insurance Claim Diagnostics — FAQ
If I instruct you, are you acting for me or for my insurer?
Neither, in the advocacy sense. You instruct and pay for the investigation, but the conclusions are reached on the physical evidence and do not change to suit the instructing party. We take no part in the claim itself — we do not handle it, progress it or negotiate it. If the evidence does not support your position, the report will say so. That independence is what makes the evidence usable by anyone else who has to consider it.
Can you review a loss adjuster's or insurer's report?
Yes. We carry out an independent technical review of reports already on file — whether the stated conclusions are supported by the evidence produced, whether the investigation was adequate for the conclusion drawn, and what further evidence would be needed. That is a technical review of technical content, not a review of the claims-handling process or of the policy.
Can you tell me whether my policy covers the damage?
No. Policy cover and policy wording are matters for your insurer and, where appropriate, your legal adviser. Our role is to establish the technical cause of the damage, its extent, and the remedial work it requires. That technical position is often what the cover question then turns on, but the cover decision itself is not ours to make.
What is the difference between defect-related and event-related damage?
Event-related damage arises from a discrete, identifiable occurrence — for example a sudden escape of water or a storm. Defect-related damage arises from an inherent construction deficiency, a failed detail or a maintenance shortfall acting over time. The two frequently coexist. Distinguishing pre-existing defect, deterioration and event-related damage can be technically important when the building evidence is considered in the context of an insurance claim, so it is established on physical evidence rather than assumed from the symptom.
What is SEE THE DEFECT, and does it prove my case?
It is a paid add-on that renders the diagnosis already reached in the technical report as a single explanatory chain — source, mechanism, pathway, affected fabric, symptom, remedial intervention — so a non-technical reader can follow it. It explains an approved diagnosis. It does not independently diagnose anything, it produces no findings of its own, and it does not prove or establish causation. Where the report qualifies a finding, the visualisation carries the same qualification.
Is this the same as a CPR Part 35 expert report?
No. This work is instructed as independent technical investigation of building defects, damage mechanisms and causation, and is scoped separately. Where BPD is separately instructed to provide expert evidence for civil proceedings, the expert's duty is to help the court on matters within their expertise, and that duty overrides any obligation to the person from whom instructions are received or by whom the expert is paid. CPR Part 35 and Practice Direction 35 apply to that separate instruction, and it is confirmed separately.
Can your evidence be used in an insurance complaint?
We produce independent technical evidence on the building, suitable for consideration in an insurance complaint, including matters referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service. The instructing party decides whether and how to use it. Building Pathology Diagnostics is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or part of the Financial Ombudsman Service; we are not a party to its process, we make no submissions on anyone's behalf, and we do not advise on how a complaint should be pursued.
Building Pathology Diagnostics provides independent technical investigation of building defects, damage mechanisms and causation, and the forensic diagnostic opinion arising from it. We do not provide legal advice, insurance advice or claims-handling services; we do not investigate, handle, progress or negotiate the claim itself; and we do not act as an insurer, loss adjuster, loss assessor, claims manager or claimant representative. We do not mediate, arbitrate, adjudicate or determine disputes between parties. Building Pathology Diagnostics is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or part of the Financial Ombudsman Service. Policy cover and policy wording are matters for the insurer and the instructing party’s legal adviser. For legal strategy on a claim or complaint, instruct a qualified solicitor. All fees are subject to scope confirmation and are exclusive of VAT where applicable. Terms of engagement are issued upon instruction.