Not upheld: Travel / life insurance claim disputes complaint against Eridge Underwriting Agency Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr F complained that Eridge unfairly declined his motor insurance claim following the theft of his modified vehicle. Mr F had modified the vehicle over six months but failed to disclose these modifications to Eridge despite clear policy requirements to do so. The ombudsman found that Eridge had sufficiently communicated the need for disclosure through policy documents and adjustment forms. Since Eridge's underwriting criteria would have declined cover had the modifications been disclosed, the ombudsman upheld Eridge's decision to decline the claim and not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Eridge had made clear through policy documents that modifications must be disclosed. The modifications significantly altered the vehicle from its original state. Mr F failed to notify Eridge of these modifications at any point before the theft. Eridge's underwriting criteria would have declined cover had it been aware. The ombudsman rejected Mr F's suggestion that medical history was a factor in the decline, finding the claim was declined solely on the basis of non-disclosure of modifications.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website