Not upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Howden UK Brokers Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained to Howden UK Brokers Limited after his boat sank and the underwriter refused his claim because the boat was moored at a different location than stated in the policy. Mr M believed Howden should have disclosed his intention to move the boat from a marina to his boathouse to the underwriter at policy inception. The ombudsman found that Howden acted fairly by providing accurate information about the marina mooring at the time of inception, as Mr M had not provided a confirmed completion date for the boathouse. The ombudsman determined it was Mr M's responsibility to notify the insurer of changes to the mooring location, which he failed to do on two occasions. The ombudsman concluded that even if Howden had disclosed the future intention, Mr M would likely have been without insurance at the time of loss, as he was unable to find alternative coverage for the boathouse location.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that Howden provided accurate information to the underwriter based on the circumstances at policy inception. Since Mr M had not provided a confirmed completion date for the boathouse, and the build was within Mr M's control rather than Howden's, it was reasonable for Howden not to disclose the future intention in the fact find. The policy documentation clearly placed the obligation on Mr M to notify of any changes to the mooring location. Mr M demonstrated awareness of this obligation by contacting Howden to change his address. Even if Howden had disclosed the intention to move the boat, the ombudsman found no evidence that this would have materially changed the outcome, as Mr M would likely have been without insurance at the time of the loss regardless, given his inability to find alternative coverage for the boathouse location.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website