Veste

Not upheld: PPI mis-selling complaint against Lloyds Bank Insurance Services Limited

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-3811372 of 2022-11-21T00:00:00+00:00. PPI mis-selling complaint against Lloyds Bank Insurance Services Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-3811372
Decision date2022-11-21T00:00:00+00:00
FirmLloyds Bank Insurance Services Limited
ProductHome insurance
Claim typePPI mis-selling
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNo compensation ordered. The ombudsman decided no remedy was necessary as the complaint was not upheld.

Summary

Ms O complained that Lloyds mis-sold her a home contents insurance policy in 2015 when she needed buildings cover for her shared ownership flat. When she made a claim in 2019 for water damage, it was rejected as not covered under the contents-only policy. The ombudsman found the policy was sold on a non-advised basis with clear information provided annually through policy and renewal documents. Ms O received these documents and had attempted to make claims in 2017-2018, indicating awareness of the cover. The ombudsman concluded Ms O had ample opportunity to cancel or amend the policy over the years but did not do so until 2019, and therefore the complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the policy was sold on a non-advised basis, meaning Lloyds did not recommend the policy or have a duty to ensure suitability. Lloyds provided clear information about the contents-only cover through annual documents, which Ms O received and acknowledged. The ombudsman noted that Ms O had multiple opportunities over the years to cancel the policy or take out buildings cover if she believed it unsuitable, but did not do so until 2019. The fact that Ms O attempted to claim for mobile phone damage in 2017-2018 indicated she understood the policy provided contents cover.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Lloyds Bank Insurance Services Limited, all decisions6210%
PPI mis-selling, all decisions85,74025%
Home insurance, all decisions20,95938%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website