“We were then contacted three years after the event when Mr and Mrs McCall wanted to make a claim for impact damage and subsidence caused by a diverted river. Initial investigations concluded the impact damage was minimal and there was not considered to have been any movement in the property.
“Following further investigations we agreed to deal with the subsidence damage to the property and the work is underway. The final cost involved for this has yet to be determined.”
A spokesman for Fos said it could not discuss individual cases and that it would decline to discuss the “merits” of the final decision any further.