A week of rain, months of uncertainty

To the Resilience Council,

I support RS-001. I am writing from my own records because a storm does not have to become a national headline to leave a small business short of cash and unable to reopen normally.

On 14 November 2025, rainwater entered the lower room of the workspace I use in Málaga. I cannot tell from my records whether the cause was a blocked drain, water entering from outside, or both. I can tell what I had to do next. I moved what I could, arranged emergency pumping, and kept receipts. The room was unusable for eight days. I returned to limited use on the ninth day.

The immediate costs were €214.50 for pumping on 15 November, €186.34 for electrical work on 17 November, and €312.00 to rent drying equipment from 18 to 25 November. I recorded another €1,471.80 for damaged contents that had to be cleaned or replaced. The total in my file is €2,184.64. That figure does not include the value of the days when I could not use the room normally.

I notified my insurer on 18 November, four days after the damage, and submitted the receipts and photographs with the claim. The claim was acknowledged on 21 November. An assessor visited on 3 December. As of today, 8 March 2026, I have no written decision and no payment. I am not naming the insurer because this letter is about a process and a pattern, not an accusation against one company.

What the process asked of me

I kept copies of the notification, the acknowledgement, the visit date, and every invoice. I followed up because I needed to know whether to keep the damaged items, whether further work would be covered, and how much cash I should reserve. While the file remained unresolved, I paid the emergency costs from money that would otherwise have stayed available for ordinary expenses. Waiting did not pause those expenses.

In Spain, Article 16 of the Insurance Contract Act (Ley 50/1980) generally requires the policyholder to notify the insurer within seven days of learning of the claim, unless the policy sets a longer period. Article 18 requires payment, within 40 days of receiving notice of the claim, of the minimum amount the insurer may owe. I reported promptly and supplied records. I am not asking the Council to decide the legal merits of my individual file. I am explaining why a clear decision timetable matters, and why the existing framework has not given me the practical certainty I needed.

Storm damage can also raise a question about which route applies. Spain’s Consorcio de Compensación de Seguros covers certain extraordinary risks, including extraordinary flooding, subject to the relevant insurance and coverage conditions. Not every instance of rainwater damage qualifies. In my case, I could not tell from the event alone which route would apply, and I did not have a clear basis to assume that a public disaster declaration would unlock bridge funding. That uncertainty is itself a burden when a room needs drying and bills are due.

What I want the standard to change

A decision within 30 days would not mean every claim must be paid in full by then. It would mean that a small business receives a reasoned answer: what has been accepted, what remains disputed or unverified, what evidence is still needed, and what happens next. If more investigation is required, the claimant should be told why and given a specific next review date. A file should not become silent simply because it is complicated.

Bridge funding within 10 days of a declared disaster would solve a different problem. It would give affected micro businesses a temporary way to meet immediate costs while insurance and other assessments continue. The funding should be simple to request, proportionate to the damage, and clear about repayment or adjustment once a claim is settled. It should not require a business owner to prove the entire final loss before receiving help to reopen.

I support the Council’s Reopen Map because records from many places can show what a single claim cannot: how long essential spaces stay unusable, what people pay before a decision, and where support falls between insurance and public disaster response. I would want the map to protect members’ identities and locations where disclosure could identify a business. It should record dates, durations, and costs, not turn a member’s hardship into a public address.