Not upheld: Home insurance claim disputes complaint against Lloyds Bank Insurance Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms A complained that Lloyds Bank Insurance Services Limited mis-sold her home insurance policy, citing declined claims and requesting refund of premiums paid since 2011. The ombudsman found that Lloyds provided comprehensive renewal documentation annually containing clear information about cover, exclusions, and premium costs, complying with ICOB requirements for non-advised sales. The ombudsman determined that declined claims do not constitute mis-selling and that the policy was not unfit for purpose. Applying the six-year limitation under DISP rules, the ombudsman considered only sales from 2016 onwards and found no evidence of mis-selling. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied ICOB rules requiring clear and sufficient information for non-advised sales. The ombudsman noted that the six-year limitation under DISP rules meant only sales from 2016 onwards could be considered. The July 2020 renewal pack contained comprehensive information enabling Ms A to make an informed decision. The ombudsman found that declined claims do not constitute mis-selling or render a policy unfit for purpose, as insurance covers specific listed instances with exclusions. The fact that legal expense cover is underwritten by another insurer is not uncommon and does not undermine Lloyds' accountability or constitute mis-selling.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website